alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Weak amenability and Cowling’s conjecture for almost connected groups

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

We characterize weak amenability for arbitrary connected Lie groups and prove the product formula for the Cowling–Haagerup constant in terms of the simple factors of a Levi decomposition. Consequently, the constant is invariant under local isomorphism and decreases under quotients of connected locally compact groups. We also prove that a locally compact group GG with amenable component group G/G0G/G^0 has the Haagerup property if and only if it is weakly amenable with constant one. This proves Cowling's conjecture for connected Lie groups and almost connected locally compact groups. For groups with amenable component group, the Cowling–Haagerup constant is unchanged by every closed central quotient. We deduce applications to lattices and their central quotients. The proof combines Ozawa's invariant-state obstruction with averaging over central characters and the tensor identity for induced representations.

Introduction

Weak amenability and the Haagerup property are two extensions of amenability that are expressed in terms of approximation by functions on a locally compact group. Weak amenability requires a bounded approximation of the constant function 1 by elements of the Fourier algebra, where boundedness is measured in the Herz–Schur norm. The optimal bound is the Cowling–Haagerup constant ΛWA(G)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G). The Haagerup property requires approximation by normalized continuous positive definite functions vanishing at infinity. Cowling’s conjecture [Ver24, Conjecture 9.5 p. 24] [6 p. 7] asks whether the optimal bound one forces this positive approximation.

2020 Mathematics subject classification: 22E15, 43A22, 43A35, 46L07.

Key words: weak amenability, Cowling–Haagerup constant, Haagerup property, connected Lie groups, central extensions.

Conjecture 1.1 Let GG be a locally compact group. If ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1, then GG has the Haagerup property.

For background on weak amenability and Cowling’s conjecture, see Vergara’s survey [Ver24, Sections 5 pp. 14–16 and 9 pp. 23–24]. For connected simple Lie groups, the weak amenability constants are known from the works [13], [10], [12], [15], [18] and [21] of de Canniére, Cowling, Dorofaeff, Haagerup and Hansen. Recall that a connected Lie group is said to be simple [HiN12, Definition 12.1.15 p. 467] if its Lie algebra g\mathfrak{g} is simple, that is, if the only ideals of g\mathfrak{g} are {0}\{0\} and g\mathfrak{g} and further g\mathfrak{g} is non-abelian.

For a connected simple Lie group, real rank zero is equivalent to compactness, as recalled in Proposition 2.1 below. In real rank one, Cartan’s classification gives three infinite families, locally isomorphic to SO0(1,n)\mathrm{SO}_0(1,n), SU(1,n)\mathrm{SU}(1,n) or Sp(1,n)\mathrm{Sp}(1,n), and the exceptional group F4(−20)\mathrm{F}_4(-20). The ranges in the following theorem avoid the low-dimensional repetitions, see [30 Theorem 6.105 p. 421 and (6.109)–(6.110) p. 426]. This description follows the introduction of [39 Section 1, pp. 1–2 of the preprint]. The notation F4(−20)\mathrm{F}_4(-20) denotes the connected adjoint group of the non-compact real form of type F4\mathrm{F}_4 and real rank one. Geometrically, it is the isometry group of the octonionic hyperbolic plane. In [39 Section 1], Valette recalls Tits’ construction of this plane, whereas Allcock describes in [1 Section 1] its realization using an exceptional Jordan algebra. The rank-one groups have different approximation properties, as the following theorem shows.

Theorem 1.2 ([13], [10], [12], [15], [18], [21]) A connected simple Lie group GG is weakly amenable if and only if the real rank of GG is zero or one. In this case, the weak amenability constant is

ΛWA(G)={1when G has real rank zero,1when G≈SO0(1,n), n≥2,1when G≈SU(1,n), n≥2,2n−1when G≈Sp(1,n), n≥2,21when G≈F4(−20).(1)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)= \begin{cases} 1 & \text{when }G\text{ has real rank zero},\\ 1 & \text{when }G\approx\mathrm{SO}_0(1,n),\ n\ge2,\\ 1 & \text{when }G\approx\mathrm{SU}(1,n),\ n\ge2,\\ 2n-1 & \text{when }G\approx\mathrm{Sp}(1,n),\ n\ge2,\\ 21 & \text{when }G\approx\mathrm{F}_4(-20). \end{cases} \tag*{(1)}

Here G≈HG\approx H means that the group GG is locally isomorphic to HH. The statement, including groups with infinite centre, is recorded in [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102].

Recall that by [40 Theorem 2.11.4 p. 94] two Lie groups are locally isomorphic if and only if their Lie algebras are isomorphic. Muruganandam gave a simpler proof of the constants for groups locally isomorphic to SU(1,n)\mathrm{SU}(1,n) and Sp(1,n)\mathrm{Sp}(1,n) with finite centre, and for F4(−20)\mathrm{F}_4(-20), using spherical Fourier analysis, see [Mur08, Theorem 4.4 p. 643]. We recall the following classification [6 Theorem 4.0.1 p. 41] of connected Lie groups with the Haagerup property.

Theorem 1.3 ([6]) A connected Lie group GG has the Haagerup property if and only if it is locally isomorphic to a direct product

H×SO0(1,n1)×⋯×SO0(1,nk)×SU(1,m1)×⋯×SU(1,ml),H\times\mathrm{SO}_0(1,n_1)\times\cdots\times\mathrm{SO}_0(1,n_k)\times\mathrm{SU}(1,m_1)\times\cdots\times\mathrm{SU}(1,m_l),

where HH is a connected amenable Lie group.

The non-compact simple factors appearing in this classification are precisely those with weak amenability constant one in Theorem 1.2. The additional structural requirement is that these factors commute with the radical at the Lie algebra level. This leads us to study the action of the non-compact simple ideals of a Levi subalgebra on the radical.

For connected simply connected Lie groups, Knudby proved in [32 Theorem 4 p. 691] that weak amenability is equivalent to the requirement that every non-compact simple ideal si\mathfrak{s}_i of a Levi subalgebra has real rank one and satisfies [si,r]=0[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]=0, where r\mathfrak{r} denotes the radical. He also obtained the product formula for the weak amenability constant and explicitly expected the theorem to remain valid without the assumption of simple connectedness.

The case where the connected analytic Levi subgroup has finite centre was treated by Cowling, Dorofaeff, Seeger and Wright in [11 Main Theorem p. 435]. The general semisimple case reduces to the case of connected simple Lie groups by [33 Theorem 3.1 p. 102]. More precisely, if GG is a connected semisimple Lie group, i.e., the Lie algebra of GG is semisimple then GG is locally isomorphic to a direct product S1×⋯×SnS_1 \times\cdots\times S_n of connected simple Lie groups S1,…,SnS_1,\ldots,S_n and GG is weakly amenable if and only if each SiS_i is weakly amenable. In this case, we have

ΛWA(G)=∏i=1nΛWA(Si).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=\prod_{i=1}^{n}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i).

For an arbitrary connected Lie group, the analytic Levi subgroup need not be closed, and the universal covering homomorphism can have an infinite central kernel. Both points have to be taken into account. Example 5.2 illustrates the first issue.

Our main result gives the weak amenability classification for arbitrary connected Lie groups. Let g=r⋊s\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{r}\rtimes\mathfrak{s} be a Levi decomposition [30 Theorem B.2 p. 660] of the Lie algebra g\mathfrak{g} of a connected Lie group GG, with radical r\mathfrak{r}. In particular, s\mathfrak{s} is a semisimple subalgebra of g\mathfrak{g} and with [4 Chapter I, Section 6.2, Proposition 2 p. 53] we can write s=s1⊕⋯⊕sn\mathfrak{s}=\mathfrak{s}_1\oplus\cdots\oplus\mathfrak{s}_n as a sum of simple ideals. Let SiS_i be the connected analytic subgroup of GG with Lie algebra si\mathfrak{s}_i provided by [HiN12, Theorem 9.4.8 p. 332], equipped with its intrinsic Lie group topology.

Theorem 1 Let GG be a connected Lie group. With the previous notation, GG is weakly amenable if and only if each si\mathfrak{s}_i is compact, or has real rank one and satisfies [si,r]=0[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]=0. In this case, we have

ΛWA(G)=∏i=1nΛWA(Si).(2)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=\prod_{i=1}^{n}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i). \tag*{(2)}

Consequently, the constant ΛWA\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}} is invariant under local isomorphism of connected Lie groups.

Empty products in (2) are understood to be one. The constants of the simple factors depend only on their Lie algebras. By Theorem 1.2, they equal one in compact type and for the Lie algebras so(1,m)\mathfrak{so}(1,m) and su(1,m)\mathfrak{su}(1,m), equal 2m−12m-1 for the Lie algebra sp(1,m)\mathfrak{sp}(1,m) with m≥2m\geq2, and equal 2121 for f4(−20)\mathfrak{f}_{4(-20)}. [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102], simple factors of real rank at least two are not weakly amenable.

We next obtain the following consequence for Conjecture 1.1. We write G0G^0 for the identity component of a locally compact group GG. Recall that GG is said to be almost connected (or connected-by-compact) [37 Definition 12.2.1 p. 1305] if G/G0G/G^0 is compact.

Theorem 2 Let GG be a locally compact group such that G/G0G/G^0 is amenable. Then

ΛWA(G)=1⟺G has the Haagerup property.\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1 \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad G\text{ has the Haagerup property.}

In particular, Conjecture 1.1 holds for any connected Lie group and for any almost connected locally compact group.

The theorem is stated without a countability assumption. To remove countability assumptions, we pass to compactly generated open subgroups and then to second countable quotients by compact normal subgroups. This allows us to use the permanence of the Haagerup property under extensions with amenable quotient in its usual second countable form.

For connected Lie groups, the implication ΛWA(G)=1⇒\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1 \Rightarrow Haagerup property can also be assembled from results in the literature, see Remark 3.4. The reverse implication requires the upper bound in Theorem 1, which relies on the central lifting of § 4.

The classification also determines the behaviour under quotients. For a connected locally compact group GG and a closed normal subgroup NN, we obtain ΛWA(G/N)≤ΛWA(G)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/N) \leq\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) in Corollary 7.1. For central quotients, equality holds under the more general assumptions of Theorem 2, as the following result shows.

Theorem 3 Let GG be a locally compact group such that the group G/G0G/G^{0} is amenable, and let ZZ be a closed central subgroup of GG. Then

ΛWA(G/Z)=ΛWA(G).(3)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G). \tag*{(3)}

The conclusion also holds if the group (G/Z)/(G/Z)0(G/Z)/(G/Z)^{0} is amenable. In particular, it holds if either GG or G/ZG/Z is almost connected.

No compactness assumption is imposed on the group ZZ. The equality in (3) includes infinite constants. For lattices in connected locally compact groups, it gives the corresponding equality for quotients by subgroups contained in the centre of the ambient group, together with a Haagerup conclusion at constant one, see Corollary 7.5. We also record in Corollary 5.4 that the finite constants of connected Lie groups are precisely the positive odd integers.

A approach of the paper. For the necessity in Theorem 1, we apply Ozawa’s theorem [Oza12, Theorem A p. 333 (see Theorem 2.2 below) on invariant states to the closed normal nilradical of GG. A non-trivial action of a non-compact simple Levi ideal survives on a vector group quotient of this nilradical. The resulting state contradicts the amenability criterion of Cornulier and Valette [9 Proposition 2.2, (i) ⇔ (iii), p. 8 of the preprint] for affine actions on vector groups. The argument takes place in GG itself and does not require a closed Levi subgroup.

For the converse, we use continuous families of positive definite functions transforming under central characters. These families are supplied by the generalized Haagerup property studied in [6 Section 4.2 pp. 46–61], whose rank-one input is the positive definiteness of covariant spherical functions of Flensted-Jensen [17]. Averaging over the central characters gives a positive definite function whose representation is absolutely continuous along the centre. The tensor identity for induction then shows that multiplying a lifted Fourier algebra function by this average produces an element of the Fourier algebra A(G)A(G) of the group GG. This yields the required upper bound. The lower bound uses the closed semisimple subgroup generated by the factors with constants greater than one.

Structure of the paper. Section 2 recalls the notation and permanence results. Section 3 proves the obstruction associated with the action on the radical. Section 4 establishes the central lifting argument. We prove Theorem 1 in Section 5 and Theorem 2 in Section 6. Section 7 proves Theorem 3 and the consequences for quotients and lattices.

Preliminaries

All locally compact groups are Hausdorff. Haar measures are left Haar measures, and scalar products are linear in the first variable. Representations on Hilbert spaces are strongly continuous. We denote by C0(G)C_0(G) the algebra of continuous complex-valued functions on a locally compact group GG vanishing at infinity and by Cc(G)C_c(G) the algebra of those with compact support. Convergence uniformly on compact subsets is used throughout.

Positive definite functions A continuous function φ:G→C\varphi:G\to\mathbb{C} is positive definite [2 Definition C.4.1 p. 351] if for any s1,…,sn∈Gs_1,\ldots,s_n\in G and complex numbers c1,…,cn∈Cc_1,\ldots,c_n\in\mathbb{C} we have

∑i,j=1ncjci‾φ(sj−1si)≥0.\sum_{i,j=1}^{n} c_j\overline{c_i}\varphi(s_j^{-1}s_i)\geq0.

We denote by P(G)P(G) the cone of continuous positive definite functions on GG. We write P1(G)≔{φ∈P(G):φ(e)=1}P_1(G)\coloneqq\{\varphi\in P(G):\varphi(e)=1\}. For any function φ∈P(G)\varphi\in P(G), its cyclic GNS representation [2 Theorem C.4.10 p. 354] is denoted by (πφ,Hφ,ξφ)(\pi_\varphi,\mathcal{H}_\varphi,\xi_\varphi), so that

φ(s)=⟨πφ(s)ξφ,ξφ⟩Hφ\varphi(s)=\langle\pi_\varphi(s)\xi_\varphi,\xi_\varphi\rangle_{\mathcal{H}_\varphi}

for any s∈Gs\in G with ∥ξφ∥Hφ2=φ(e)\lVert\xi_\varphi\rVert_{\mathcal{H}_\varphi}^2=\varphi(e). By [2 Proposition C.4.2 p. 351], we have the inequality ∣φ(s)∣≤φ(e)|\varphi(s)|\leq\varphi(e) for any s∈Gs\in G.

Haagerup property The locally compact group GG has the Haagerup property if there exists a net in P1(G)∩C0(G)P_1(G)\cap C_0(G) converging to one uniformly on compact subsets. We use this net formulation for arbitrary locally compact groups, as in [9 Definition 1.1 p. 1 of the preprint]. For second countable groups it agrees with the usual Haagerup property and its characterization by metrically proper affine isometric actions [6 Definition 1.1.1 p. 2 and Theorem 2.1.1 pp. 15–16]. Outside that setting, all assertions below refer to the net formulation.

For the final extension argument, we record two facts about the Haagerup property. If KK is a compact normal subgroup of GG, the quotient map q:G→G/Kq:G\to G/K is proper by [3 Chapter III, Section 4.1, Corollary 2 to Proposition 1 p. 251]. In particular, it is closed, and the inverse image of any compact subset of G/KG/K is compact [3 Chapter I, Section 10.2, Proposition 6 p. 104]. Consequently, if f∈C0(G/K)f\in C_0(G/K) and ε>0\varepsilon>0, then

{s∈G:∣f(q(s))∣≥ε}=q−1({y∈G/K:∣f(y)∣≥ε})\{s\in G:|f(q(s))|\geq\varepsilon\}=q^{-1}\left(\{y\in G/K:|f(y)|\geq\varepsilon\}\right)

is compact. Thus pullback under qq preserves vanishing at infinity, as well as positive definiteness and normalization.

Conversely, the Haagerup property passes from GG to G/KG/K. Indeed, let φi∈P1(G)∩C0(G)\varphi_i\in P_1(G)\cap C_0(G) converge to one uniformly on compact subsets, and put

vi(s)≔∫K∫Kφi(ksk′) dk dk′,s∈G,v_i(s)\coloneqq\int_K\int_K\varphi_i(ksk')\,dk\,dk',\qquad s\in G,

where Haar measure on KK is normalized. Let (πi,Hi,ξi)(\pi_i,\mathcal{H}_i,\xi_i) be the GNS representation of φi\varphi_i. By [14 Section 6.2 p. 79], the operator

Eiη≔∫Kπi(k)η dk,η∈Hi,E_i\eta\coloneqq\int_K\pi_i(k)\eta\,dk,\qquad\eta\in\mathcal{H}_i,

is the orthogonal projection onto the space of KK-fixed vectors. The integral is a Bochner integral, since the orbit map is continuous on the compact group KK. Invariance of Haar measure under inversion and Fubini’s theorem give

vi(s)=⟨πi(s)Eiξi,Eiξi⟩Hi,s∈G.v_i(s)=\langle\pi_i(s)E_i\xi_i,E_i\xi_i\rangle_{\mathcal{H}_i},\qquad s\in G.

Thus viv_i is positive definite and KK-bi-invariant. It belongs to C0(G)C_0(G): if ∣φi∣<ε|\varphi_i|<\varepsilon outside a compact set FF, then ∣vi∣≤ε|v_i|\leq\varepsilon outside KFKKFK. For any compact subset QQ of GG, the set KQKKQK is compact, and sup⁡s∈Q∣vi(s)−1∣≤sup⁡x∈KQK∣φi(x)−1∣\sup_{s\in Q}|v_i(s)-1|\leq\sup_{x\in KQK}|\varphi_i(x)-1|. Hence vi→1v_i\to1 uniformly on compact subsets and vi(e)→1v_i(e)\to1. For ii sufficiently large, let v˙i\dot v_i be the continuous function on G/KG/K such that v˙i∘q=vi/vi(e)\dot v_i\circ q=v_i/v_i(e). It is positive definite and normalized. For any ε>0\varepsilon>0, its level set satisfies

{y∈G/K:∣v˙i(y)∣≥ε}=q({s∈G:∣vi(s)∣≥εvi(e)}),\{y\in G/K:|\dot v_i(y)|\geq\varepsilon\}=q\left(\{s\in G:|v_i(s)|\geq\varepsilon v_i(e)\}\right),

which is compact. Hence v˙i∈C0(G/K)\dot v_i\in C_0(G/K). For any compact subset FF of G/KG/K, its inverse image q−1(F)q^{-1}(F) is compact, and uniform convergence of vi/vi(e)v_i/v_i(e) on this inverse image gives uniform convergence of v˙i\dot v_i on FF. Hence GG has the Haagerup property if and only if G/KG/K has it.

If HH is an open subgroup of GG, the extension by zero of φ∈P(H)\varphi\in P(H) belongs to P(G)P(G) by [28 Lemma 7.1.2 p. 238]. Since HH is closed, this extension also preserves normalization and vanishing at infinity.

For second countable groups we will use the following permanence result [6 Proposition 6.1.5 and Example 6.1.6, pp. 90–91]: if NN is a closed normal subgroup, G/NG/N is amenable and NN has the Haagerup property, then GG has the Haagerup property. The countability assumption in Theorem 2 will be removed explicitly in § 6.

Herz–Schur multipliers Let GG be a locally compact group equipped with a left Haar measure and let λG:G→B(L2(G))\lambda_G:G\to B(L^2(G)) be its left regular representation on the complex Hilbert space L2(G)L^2(G). According to [28 Theorem 2.4.3 p. 59] and [28 Lemma 2.3.6 p. 52], the Fourier algebra A(G)A(G) can be seen as the set of all functions fˉ∗gˇ\bar f*\check g, where f,g∈L2(G)f,g\in L^2(G). Here gˇ(s):=g(s−1)\check g(s)\mathrel{\mathop:}=g(s^{-1}) for any s∈Gs\in G. For any s∈Gs\in G, note that

(fˉ∗gˇ)(s)=∫Gf(t)‾gˇ(t−1s) dt=∫Gf(t)‾g(s−1t) dt=⟨λG(s)g,f⟩L2(G).(4)(\bar f*\check g)(s)=\int_G\overline{f(t)}\check g(t^{-1}s)\,\mathrm{d}t=\int_G\overline{f(t)}g(s^{-1}t)\,\mathrm{d}t=\langle\lambda_G(s)g,f\rangle_{L^2(G)}. \tag*{(4)}

where ⟨g,f⟩L2(G):=∫Gg(t)f(t)‾ dt\langle g,f\rangle_{L^2(G)}\mathrel{\mathop:}=\int_G g(t)\overline{f(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t. In other words, the Fourier algebra A(G)A(G) is the set of matrix coefficients of the left regular representation λ:G→B(L2(G))\lambda:G\to B(L^2(G)) of the locally compact group GG. The Fourier algebra A(G)A(G) is equipped with the norm

∥u∥A(G)=inf⁡{∥f∥L2(G)∥g∥L2(G):u(s)=⟨λG(s)g,f⟩L2(G), s∈G}.\|u\|_{A(G)}=\inf\{\|f\|_{L^2(G)}\|g\|_{L^2(G)}:u(s)=\langle\lambda_G(s)g,f\rangle_{L^2(G)},\ s\in G\}.

It is a Banach algebra contained in C0(G)C_0(G), see [28 Proposition 2.3.3 and Corollary 2.3.5 pp. 51–52]. A continuous function u:G→Cu:G\to\mathbb{C} is a Herz–Schur multiplier if there are bounded continuous maps a,b:G→Ha,b:G\to\mathcal{H} into a complex Hilbert space H\mathcal{H} such that u(t−1s)=⟨a(s),b(t)⟩Hu(t^{-1}s)=\langle a(s),b(t)\rangle_{\mathcal{H}} for any s,t∈Gs,t\in G. Its norm ∥u∥B2(G)\|u\|_{B_2(G)} is the infimum of ∥a∥∞∥b∥∞\|a\|_\infty\|b\|_\infty over these factorizations. This agrees with the completely bounded Fourier multiplier norm [31 Proposition 3.1 p. 3475] [26 Theorem p. 311]. We will use

∥u∥∞≤∥u∥B2(G)≤∥u∥A(G)(u∈A(G)),∥φ∥B2(G)=φ(e)(φ∈P(G)).(5)\|u\|_\infty\leq\|u\|_{B_2(G)}\leq\|u\|_{A(G)}\quad(u\in A(G)),\qquad\|\varphi\|_{B_2(G)}=\varphi(e)\quad(\varphi\in P(G)). \tag*{(5)}

Herz–Schur multipliers form a Banach algebra [33 Section 2.1 p. 104]. The norm inequality for pointwise products also follows directly by tensoring the defining factorizations. If q:G→Hq:G\to H is a continuous group homomorphism, pulling back a factorization gives

∥u∘q∥B2(G)≤∥u∥B2(H).(6)\|u\circ q\|_{B_2(G)}\leq\|u\|_{B_2(H)}. \tag*{(6)}

see also [38 Corollary 6.3 p. 185].

Weak amenability. The group GG is said to be weakly amenable [12 (0.4) p. 509] if there exists a net (ui)(u_i) in A(G)A(G) converging to one uniformly on compact subsets with sup⁡i∥ui∥B2(G)<∞\sup_i \lVert u_i\rVert_{\mathrm{B}_2(G)} < \infty. The infimum of these bounds is ΛWA(G)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G). It is set equal to ∞\infty if no such net exists. By [12 Proposition 1.1 p. 510 and Corollary 1.2 p. 511], the same constant is obtained by requiring the approximating functions to belong to A(G)∩Cc(G)A(G) \cap C_c(G). Moreover, we have

B2(G)∩Cc(G)=A(G)∩Cc(G).\mathrm{B}_2(G) \cap C_c(G) = A(G) \cap C_c(G).

Indeed, if u∈B2(G)u \in\mathrm{B}_2(G) has compact support, choose v∈A(G)∩Cc(G)v \in A(G) \cap C_c(G) equal to one on supp⁡(u)\operatorname{supp}(u), by [28 Proposition 2.3.2 pp. 50–51]. Since uu is a multiplier of A(G)A(G), we have u=uv∈A(G)u = uv \in A(G). Thus this definition is also equivalent, with the same constant, to the one using compactly supported Herz–Schur multipliers [32 Section 1 p. 691].

We use the standard permanence properties [12 Proposition 1.3 p. 512]

ΛWA(H)≤ΛWA(G),ΛWA(G/K)=ΛWA(G),(7)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(H) \le\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G), \qquad\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/K) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G), \tag*{(7)}

where HH is a closed subgroup and KK is a compact normal subgroup, as well as

ΛWA(G1×G2)=ΛWA(G1)ΛWA(G2),(8)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G_1 \times G_2) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G_1)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G_2), \tag*{(8)}

see [12 Corollary 1.5 p. 514]. According to [Ver24, Proposition 4.3 p. 12], every amenable locally compact group GG satisfies ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = 1. We will also use the invariance [33 (2.4) and the following remark, p. 105], where the removal of the second countability assumption of [Jol15] is explicitly stated, under extensions with amenable quotient:

ΛWA(G)=ΛWA(N)(9)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(N) \tag*{(9)}

if NN is closed and normal and G/NG/N is amenable. In particular, we have

ΛWA(G)=ΛWA(G0)(10)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G^0) \tag*{(10)}

if G/G0G/G^0 is amenable.

For the reader’s convenience, we deduce the general case of (9) from the second countable case [Jol15, Theorem 1.5(b) p. 75 and Example 1.6(2) p. 76]. The inequality ΛWA(N)≤ΛWA(G)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(N) \le\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) follows from (7). Let HH be a compactly generated open subgroup of GG and let KK be a compact normal subgroup of HH such that H/KH/K is second countable [23 Theorem 8.7 p. 71]. The subgroup M≔(H∩N)KM \mathrel{\mathop{\coloneqq}} (H \cap N)K is closed and normal in HH. Since HH is open, the restriction to HH of the quotient map G→G/NG \to G/N is open, so that H/(H∩N)H/(H \cap N) is topologically isomorphic to the open subgroup HN/NHN/N of G/NG/N. The latter is closed, hence amenable [2 Corollary G.3.4 p. 431], and so is its quotient H/M≃(H/K)/(M/K)H/M \simeq(H/K)/(M/K). The second countable case and (7) give ΛWA(H)=ΛWA(H/K)=ΛWA(M/K)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(H) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(H/K) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(M/K). The continuous surjective homomorphism H∩N→M/KH \cap N \to M/K has compact kernel N∩KN \cap K, and it is open by [8 Corollary 2.D.6(1) p. 39], since H∩NH \cap N is σ\sigma-compact. Hence ΛWA(M/K)=ΛWA(H∩N)≤ΛWA(N)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(M/K) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(H \cap N) \le\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(N). Since ΛWA(G)=sup⁡HΛWA(H)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = \sup_H \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(H) by [12 Proposition 1.3(b) p. 512], we obtain ΛWA(G)≤ΛWA(N)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) \le\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(N).

Lie groups. We use the standard structure theory described in the books [4], [22], [HiN12] and [40] of real Lie groups. Recall that in every finite-dimensional Lie algebra g\mathfrak{g}, there is a largest solvable ideal [HiN12, Definition 5.4.5 p. 104] [4 Definition 2 p. 44] called the radical of g\mathfrak{g}, and is denoted by rad⁡(g)\operatorname{rad}(\mathfrak{g}). A Levi subalgebra [4 Definition 7 p. 63] of g\mathfrak{g} is any subalgebra of g\mathfrak{g} supplementary to the radical r\mathfrak{r}. The nilradical of a finite-dimensional real Lie algebra g\mathfrak{g} is its largest nilpotent ideal [HiN12, Definition 5.2.10 p. 94]. This convention differs from that of [4 Chapter I, Section 5.3, Definition 3 p. 44], where the nilpotent radical is defined as the intersection of the kernels of all finite-dimensional irreducible representations, see also [HiN12, Remark 5.2.11 p. 94].

A real Lie algebra is said to be compact if it is isomorphic to the Lie algebra of a compact Lie group [5 Chapter IX, Section 1.3, Proposition 1 p. 283 and Definition 1 p. 284]. For a real semisimple Lie algebra g\mathfrak{g}, let BB be its Killing form. A Cartan involution is an involutive automorphism θ\theta such that the form (X,Y)↦−B(X,θY)(X,Y) \mapsto-B(X,\theta Y) is positive definite [30 (6.13) p. 355]. Such an involution exists by [30 Corollary 6.18 p. 358]. Its eigenspaces for the eigenvalues 11 and −1-1 give a Cartan decomposition g=k⊕p\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}\oplus\mathfrak{p}. The form BB is negative definite on k\mathfrak{k} and positive definite on p\mathfrak{p} [30 (6.23)–(6.26) pp. 359–360]. The real rank of g\mathfrak{g} is the dimension of a maximal abelian subspace a\mathfrak{a} of p\mathfrak{p} [20 Section 2.5 p. 932]. For a connected semisimple Lie group GG, we define rank⁡RG:=rank⁡Rg\operatorname{rank}_{\mathbb R} G \mathrel{\mathop:}= \operatorname{rank}_{\mathbb R}\mathfrak{g}, where g\mathfrak{g} is its Lie algebra.

Proposition 2.1 Let GG be a connected real Lie group with semisimple Lie algebra g\mathfrak{g}. Then the following assertions are equivalent:

  1. rank⁡RG=0\operatorname{rank}_{\mathbb R}G=0,

  2. the Killing form of g\mathfrak{g} is negative definite,

  3. g\mathfrak{g} is compact,

  4. GG is compact.

No assumption of linearity or finiteness of the centre is required.

Proof. Choose a Cartan decomposition g=k⊕p\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}\oplus\mathfrak{p} and a maximal abelian subspace a\mathfrak{a} of p\mathfrak{p}. If rank⁡RG=0\operatorname{rank}_{\mathbb R}G=0, then a={0}\mathfrak{a}=\{0\}. If X∈pX\in\mathfrak{p} were non-zero, the one-dimensional subspace RX\mathbb{R}X would be abelian and would strictly contain a\mathfrak{a}, contradicting maximality. Hence p={0}\mathfrak{p}=\{0\} and g=k\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}. The Killing form is therefore negative definite by [30 (6.26) p. 360].

For a semisimple Lie algebra, negative definiteness of the Killing form is equivalent to compactness by [5 Chapter IX, Section 1.3, Proposition 1, (i) ⇔ (v), p. 283]. Indeed, the Killing form is non-degenerate in the semisimple case, so the negative semidefiniteness in that proposition is negative definiteness. If g\mathfrak{g} is compact, Weyl’s theorem [5 Chapter IX, Section 1.4, Theorem 1 p. 284] implies that the connected group GG is compact. The same theorem also gives finiteness of its centre.

Conversely, if GG is compact, its Lie algebra is compact by [5 Chapter IX, Section 1.3, immediately after Definition 1, p. 284]. The preceding characterization makes BB negative definite on g\mathfrak{g}. Since its restriction to p\mathfrak{p} is positive definite, we have p={0}\mathfrak{p}=\{0\}. Hence a={0}\mathfrak{a}=\{0\} and rank⁡RG=0\operatorname{rank}_{\mathbb R}G=0. This proves all the equivalences. ■

Let GG be a connected real Lie group with Lie algebra g=TeG\mathfrak{g}=T_eG. We denote by exp⁡G:g→G\exp_G:\mathfrak{g}\to G its exponential map. For any X∈gX\in\mathfrak{g}, the map t↦exp⁡G(tX)t\mapsto\exp_G(tX) is the unique one-parameter subgroup of GG whose derivative at 00 is XX [HiN12, Section 9.2 pp. 296–298]. For any s∈Gs\in G, let cs:G→Gc_s:G\to G be the conjugation automorphism defined by cs(x):=sxs−1c_s(x)\mathrel{\mathop:}=sxs^{-1}. The adjoint representation of GG is the homomorphism Ad⁡:G→GL⁡(g)\operatorname{Ad}:G\to\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{g}) defined by Ad⁡(s):=decs\operatorname{Ad}(s)\mathrel{\mathop:}=d_ec_s. Its differential at the identity is the adjoint representation ad⁡\operatorname{ad} of g\mathfrak{g}, given by ad⁡(X)Y=[X,Y]\operatorname{ad}(X)Y=[X,Y] for any X,Y∈gX,Y\in\mathfrak{g}. For any s∈Gs\in G and X∈gX\in\mathfrak{g}, we have

sexp⁡G(X)s−1=exp⁡G(Ad⁡(s)X),Ad⁡(exp⁡G(X))=ead⁡(X).s\exp_G(X)s^{-1}=\exp_G(\operatorname{Ad}(s)X),\qquad\operatorname{Ad}(\exp_G(X))=e^{\operatorname{ad}(X)}.

Moreover, since GG is connected, we have Ker⁡Ad⁡=Z(G)\operatorname{Ker}\operatorname{Ad} = Z(G) [HiN12, Section 9.2.3 pp. 306–307]. If ρ:G→GL⁡(V)\rho:G \to\operatorname{GL}(V) is a smooth representation on a finite-dimensional real vector space VV, we denote by dρ:g→gl(V)\mathrm{d}\rho:\mathfrak{g} \to\mathfrak{gl}(V) its differential at the identity. For any X∈gX \in\mathfrak{g}, we have

dρ(X)=ddt∣t=0ρ(exp⁡G(tX)),ρ(exp⁡G(X))=edρ(X).\mathrm{d}\rho(X) = \left.\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\right|_{t=0}\rho(\exp_G(tX)), \qquad\rho(\exp_G(X)) = e^{\mathrm{d}\rho(X)}.

For any Lie subalgebra h\mathfrak{h} of g\mathfrak{g}, the associated connected analytic subgroup is H=⟨exp⁡G(h)⟩H = \langle\exp_G(\mathfrak{h})\rangle. We equip HH with its intrinsic Lie group topology, which may be finer than the subspace topology inherited from GG [HiN12, Theorem 9.4.8 p. 332]. If j⊆h\mathfrak{j} \subseteq\mathfrak{h} are ideals of g\mathfrak{g}, the connectedness of GG implies that they are invariant under Ad⁡(G)\operatorname{Ad}(G). Hence the adjoint representation induces a representation ρ\rho on h/j\mathfrak{h}/\mathfrak{j} given by

ρ(g)(X+j)=Ad⁡(g)X+j,dρ(Y)(X+j)=[Y,X]+j\rho(g)(X+\mathfrak{j})=\operatorname{Ad}(g)X+\mathfrak{j}, \qquad\mathrm{d}\rho(Y)(X+\mathfrak{j})=[Y,X]+\mathfrak{j}

for any g∈Gg \in G, X∈hX \in\mathfrak{h} and Y∈gY \in\mathfrak{g}.

Ozawa’s invariant-state theorem We use Ozawa’s invariant-state theorem [36 Theorem A p. 333].

Theorem 2.2 Let GG be a locally compact group. If GG is weakly amenable and NN is an amenable closed normal subgroup of GG, then there exists a state on L∞(N)L^\infty(N) invariant under left translations by elements of NN and under conjugation by elements of GG.

Induced representations We refer to the books [2 Sections E.1–E.2 pp. 383–391] and [29 Chapter 2 pp. 45–113] for more information on induced representations. Let HH be a closed subgroup of a locally compact group GG, and let σ:H→B(Hσ)\sigma:H \to\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}_\sigma) be a strongly continuous unitary representation of HH on a Hilbert space Hσ\mathcal{H}_\sigma. We denote by Ind⁡HGσ\operatorname{Ind}_H^G \sigma the unitary representation of GG induced by σ\sigma [29 Section 2.3 pp. 61–65].

If G/HG/H admits a GG-invariant Radon measure μ\mu, the representation Ind⁡HGσ\operatorname{Ind}_H^G \sigma can be realized on the completion of the space of continuous functions F:G→HσF:G \to\mathcal{H}_\sigma with compact support modulo HH satisfying F(xh)=σ(h−1)F(x)F(xh)=\sigma(h^{-1})F(x) for any x∈Gx \in G and h∈Hh \in H, with respect to the norm

∥F∥≔(∫G/H∥F(x)∥Hσ2 dμ(xH))1/2.\lVert F\rVert\coloneqq\left(\int_{G/H}\lVert F(x)\rVert_{\mathcal{H}_\sigma}^{2}\,\mathrm{d}\mu(xH)\right)^{1/2}.

The action is given by (Ind⁡HGσ(s)F)(x)≔F(s−1x)(\operatorname{Ind}_H^G \sigma(s)F)(x) \coloneqq F(s^{-1}x) [2 Remark E.1.7 p. 388]. In particular, Ind⁡HG1H\operatorname{Ind}_H^G 1_H is the quasi-regular representation. If HH is normal and q:G→G/Hq:G \to G/H is the quotient map, it is equivalent to λG/H∘q\lambda_{G/H}\circ q. Induction preserves unitary equivalence, Hilbert direct sums and subrepresentations [2 Propositions E.2.1 and E.2.2 p. 389], see also [29 Proposition 2.42 p. 93]. Moreover, induction in stages gives Ind⁡HGλH≃λG\operatorname{Ind}_H^G\lambda_H \simeq\lambda_G [29 Example 2.23 p. 66 and Theorem 2.47 p. 96]. For any strongly continuous unitary representation π\pi of GG, the tensor product formula gives

π⊗Ind⁡HGσ≃Ind⁡HG((π∣H)⊗σ).\pi\otimes\operatorname{Ind}_H^G \sigma\simeq\operatorname{Ind}_H^G\bigl((\pi|_H)\otimes\sigma\bigr).

[29 Theorem 2.58 p. 106]. Consequently, if ZZ is a closed central subgroup of GG and q:G→G/Zq:G \to G/Z is the quotient map, then

π⊗(λG/Z∘q)≃Ind⁡ZG(π∣Z).\pi\otimes(\lambda_{G/Z}\circ q) \simeq\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G(\pi|_Z).

Here ≃\simeq denotes unitary equivalence.

The action of the Levi factor on the radical

The proof below applies Theorem 2.2 to the nilradical of GG and passes to a vector group quotient.

For an action of a group Γ\Gamma on a set XX, we use (γ⋅f)(x)≔f(γ−1x)(\gamma\cdot f)(x) \coloneqq f(\gamma^{-1}x) on ℓ∞(X)\ell^\infty(X). Invariance of a state means invariance under these operators. The same convention is used on L∞L^\infty-spaces.

Lemma 3.1 Let GG be a Lie group and HH be a connected Lie subgroup of GG whose Lie algebra h\mathfrak{h} is semisimple. If the centre of HH is finite, then HH is closed in GG.

Proof: Let g\mathfrak{g} be the Lie algebra of GG and let ι ⁣:H→G\iota\colon H \to G be the inclusion, where HH is equipped with its intrinsic Lie group topology. Consider the representation θ≔Ad⁡G∘ι\theta\coloneqq\operatorname{Ad}_{G} \circ\iota of HH on g\mathfrak{g}. Its image is closed in GL⁡(g)\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{g}) by [HiN12, Corollary 14.5.7 p. 556]. Any element of Ker⁡θ\operatorname{Ker}\theta centralizes exp⁡G(h)\exp_{G}(\mathfrak{h}), hence HH, so that Ker⁡θ⊂Z(H)\operatorname{Ker}\theta\subset Z(H) is finite. Since HH is σ\sigma-compact, [8 Corollary 2.D.6(2) p. 39] implies that θ\theta is proper. The group GG is Hausdorff and Ad⁡G∘ι\operatorname{Ad}_{G} \circ\iota is proper, so [3 Chapter I, Section 10.1, Proposition 5(d) p. 99] implies that ι\iota is proper. In particular, ι\iota is closed, and H=ι(H)H = \iota(H) is closed in GG.

Proposition 3.2 Let GG be a connected Lie group and let g=r⋊s\mathfrak{g} = \mathfrak{r} \rtimes\mathfrak{s} be a Levi decomposition of its Lie algebra. Suppose that some simple ideal si\mathfrak{s}_i of s\mathfrak{s} is non-compact and satisfies [si,r]≠0[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}] \ne0. Then GG is not weakly amenable.

Proof: Suppose that the group GG is weakly amenable.

Step 1: a closed normal nilpotent subgroup. Let n\mathfrak{n} be the nilradical of g\mathfrak{g}, that is, its largest nilpotent ideal. By [4 Chapter I, Section 5.5, Proposition 6 p. 49], any derivation of g\mathfrak{g} maps r\mathfrak{r} into n\mathfrak{n}. Applying this to the inner derivations gives [g,r]⊂n[\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{r}] \subset\mathfrak{n}. Let NN be the connected analytic subgroup of GG with Lie algebra n\mathfrak{n}. By [4 Chapter III, Section 9.7, Proposition 23 p. 354], NN is closed, nilpotent and invariant under every continuous automorphism of GG. Being nilpotent, NN is solvable, hence amenable by [2 Corollary G.2.3 p. 426]. Thus NN is a closed amenable normal subgroup of GG.

By Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility [HiN12, Theorem 5.5.21 p. 120], the si\mathfrak{s}_i-module r\mathfrak{r} is a direct sum of irreducible submodules. On each irreducible summand EE on which si\mathfrak{s}_i acts non-trivially, the subspace [si,E][\mathfrak{s}_i,E] is nonzero and invariant, hence equal to EE. On each trivial summand, it is zero. Consequently,

[si,[si,r]]=[si,r].[\mathfrak{s}_i,[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]] = [\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}].

Since [si,r]⊂[g,r]⊂n[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}] \subset[\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{r}] \subset\mathfrak{n}, we obtain [si,n]⊃[si,r]≠0[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{n}] \supset[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}] \ne0.

Step 2: si\mathfrak{s}_i acts non-trivially on n/[n,n]\mathfrak{n}/[\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}]. The subspaces n\mathfrak{n} and [n,n][\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}] are ideals of g\mathfrak{g}, hence si\mathfrak{s}_i-invariant. By Weyl’s theorem, there exists an si\mathfrak{s}_i-invariant subspace UU such that n=U⊕[n,n]\mathfrak{n} = U \oplus[\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}]. Since n\mathfrak{n} is nilpotent and U+[n,n]=nU + [\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}] = \mathfrak{n}, the subspace UU generates n\mathfrak{n} as a Lie algebra by [4 Chapter I, Section 4, Exercise 4(b) p. 91]. If si\mathfrak{s}_i acted trivially on n/[n,n]\mathfrak{n}/[\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}], it would act trivially on UU, since the quotient map restricts to an isomorphism of si\mathfrak{s}_i-modules from UU onto this quotient. Each element of ad⁡(si)\operatorname{ad}(\mathfrak{s}_i) is a derivation, so it would then vanish on every iterated bracket of elements of UU, hence on n\mathfrak{n}. This contradicts Step 1.

Step 3: a vector group quotient. By [HiN12, Corollary 11.2.7 p. 446 and Theorem 11.2.10 p. 447], the exponential map identifies NN with (n,∗)/Γ(\mathfrak{n},*)/\Gamma, where ∗* is the Campbell–Hausdorff multiplication and Γ=Ker⁡exp⁡N\Gamma= \operatorname{Ker}\exp_{N} is a discrete subgroup of z(n)\mathfrak{z}(\mathfrak{n}). For g∈Gg \in G and X∈nX \in\mathfrak{n}, equivariance gives exp⁡N(Ad⁡(g)X)=gexp⁡N(X)g−1\exp_{N}(\operatorname{Ad}(g)X) = g\exp_{N}(X)g^{-1}, so Ad⁡(g)Γ=Γ\operatorname{Ad}(g)\Gamma= \Gamma. Since GG is connected and Γ\Gamma is discrete, every element of Γ\Gamma is fixed by Ad⁡(G)\operatorname{Ad}(G). Thus t≔span⁡RΓ\mathfrak{t} \coloneqq\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb{R}}\Gamma is pointwise fixed by Ad⁡(G)\operatorname{Ad}(G). Differentiating along one-parameter subgroups gives [g,t]={0}[\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{t}]=\{0\}, so that t\mathfrak{t} is a central ideal of g\mathfrak{g}.

Put k:=[n,n]+t\mathfrak{k}\mathrel{\vcentcolon=}[\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}]+\mathfrak{t} and w:=n/k\mathfrak{w}\mathrel{\vcentcolon=}\mathfrak{n}/\mathfrak{k}. The quotient map from (n,∗)(\mathfrak{n},*) to the additive group W:=wW\mathrel{\vcentcolon=}\mathfrak{w} kills Γ\Gamma, hence descends to a continuous surjective homomorphism

q:N⟶W,q(exp⁡NX)=X+k.q:N\longrightarrow W,\qquad q(\exp_N X)=X+\mathfrak{k}.

This map is a submersion, so it is open. Since [n,n][\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}] and t\mathfrak{t} are ideals of g\mathfrak{g}, so is k\mathfrak{k}, and Ad⁡(g)k=k\operatorname{Ad}(g)\mathfrak{k}=\mathfrak{k} for any g∈Gg\in G. The kernel of qq is KN=exp⁡N(k)K_N=\exp_N(\mathfrak{k}). It is closed, normal in GG since gKNg−1=exp⁡N(Ad⁡(g)k)=KNgK_Ng^{-1}=\exp_N(\operatorname{Ad}(g)\mathfrak{k})=K_N for any g∈Gg\in G, has Lie algebra k\mathfrak{k}, and N/KN≃WN/K_N\simeq W. The adjoint action induces a continuous representation ρ:G→GL⁡(w)\rho:G\to\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{w}) satisfying q(gxg−1)=ρ(g)q(x)q(gxg^{-1})=\rho(g)q(x).

By Step 2, the si\mathfrak{s}_i-action on n/[n,n]\mathfrak{n}/[\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}] is non-trivial. The submodule k/[n,n]\mathfrak{k}/[\mathfrak{n},\mathfrak{n}] is trivial, since it is the image of t\mathfrak{t}. Weyl’s complete reducibility theorem therefore shows that the action on the quotient w\mathfrak{w} is non-trivial.

Step 4: an invariant state on L∞(w)L^\infty(\mathfrak{w}). By Theorem 2.2, there exists a state ωN\omega_N on L∞(N)L^\infty(N) which is invariant under left translations by elements of NN and under conjugations by elements of GG. We first check that pullback under qq preserves Haar null sets. Let BB be a Borel Haar null subset of WW and let (Fj)j≥1(F_j)_{j\geq1} be a sequence of compact subsets covering NN. The Haar measures of NN, KNK_N and WW are σ\sigma-finite. Weil’s formula [2 Corollary B.1.7 p. 330], extended to non-negative Borel functions by monotone convergence, gives

∫N1Fj(x)1B(q(x)) dx=∫W1B(w)∫KN1Fj(xwk) dk dw=0,\int_N 1_{F_j}(x)1_B(q(x))\,\mathrm{d}x = \int_W 1_B(w)\int_{K_N}1_{F_j}(x_wk)\,\mathrm{d}k\,\mathrm{d}w=0,

where xwx_w is any representative of the coset ww. Hence Fj∩q−1(B)F_j\cap q^{-1}(B) is Haar null for any jj, and so is q−1(B)q^{-1}(B). The same conclusion holds for subsets of Borel Haar null sets. So f↦f∘qf\mapsto f\circ q is a well-defined unital positive map from L∞(w)L^\infty(\mathfrak{w}) into L∞(N)L^\infty(N), and ωW(f):=ωN(f∘q)\omega_W(f)\mathrel{\vcentcolon=}\omega_N(f\circ q) defines a state on L∞(w)L^\infty(\mathfrak{w}). For a,x∈Na,x\in N and g∈Gg\in G, we have f(q(a)+q(x))=(f∘q)(ax)f(q(a)+q(x))=(f\circ q)(ax) and f(ρ(g)q(x))=(f∘q)(gxg−1)f(\rho(g)q(x))=(f\circ q)(gxg^{-1}). Hence ωW\omega_W is invariant under translations by elements of w\mathfrak{w} and under the linear action of ρ(G)\rho(G).

Step 5: conclusion. Let H:=ρ(Si)H\mathrel{\vcentcolon=}\rho(S_i). By Step 3, the differential of ρ∣Si\rho|_{S_i} is nonzero, hence injective since si\mathfrak{s}_i is simple. By [HiN12, Corollary 14.5.7 p. 556], the image HH of this representation of the connected semisimple Lie group SiS_i is closed in GL⁡(w)\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{w}). Its Lie algebra is isomorphic to the non-compact simple Lie algebra si\mathfrak{s}_i. Thus HH is a non-compact connected simple Lie group and is not amenable by [2 Example G.3.6(ii) p. 431].

For every Borel subset BB of w\mathfrak{w}, put m(B):=ωW([1B])m(B)\mathrel{\vcentcolon=}\omega_W([1_B]). This defines a finitely additive probability measure on the Borel subsets of w\mathfrak{w}. By Step 4 it is invariant under translations and under HH. These transformations preserve the Haar null sets. Apply [9 Proposition 2.2, (i) \Leftrightarrow (iii), p. 8 of the preprint] to the abstract group HH equipped with the discrete topology and its inclusion into GL⁡(w)\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{w}). The existence of mm implies that the closure of HH in GL⁡(w)\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{w}) is amenable. This contradicts the preceding paragraph.

Corollary 3.3 Let GG be a connected weakly amenable Lie group and let g=r⋉s\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{r}\ltimes\mathfrak{s} be a Levi decomposition of its Lie algebra. Then every simple ideal si\mathfrak{s}_i of s\mathfrak{s} either is compact, or has real rank one and satisfies [si,r]=0[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]=0.

Proof: A weakly amenable group has the approximation property. The characterization of connected Lie groups with this property in [HKdl16, Introduction and Theorem C, pp. 928–930] therefore implies that every simple ideal of a Levi subalgebra has real rank at most one.

A simple ideal of real rank zero is compact, and Proposition 3.2 shows that every non-compact simple ideal commutes with r\mathfrak{r}.

The closed nilradical and the kernel of its exponential covering are handled inside the ambient group in Proposition 3.2. Thus the argument imposes neither simple connectedness nor closedness of a Levi factor.

Remark 3.4 The obstruction in Proposition 3.2 also follows from published results on relative property (T). We give the argument to specify the scope of the earlier results. Suppose that GG is weakly amenable. Let p:G~→Gp:\widetilde{G}\to G be its universal covering homomorphism, let R~\widetilde{R} be the radical of G~\widetilde{G} and let S~nc\widetilde{S}_{nc} be the connected subgroup associated with the sum snc\mathfrak{s}_{nc} of the non-compact simple ideals of a Levi subalgebra. Put N:=[S~nc,R~]N\mathrel{\mathop:}= [\widetilde{S}_{nc},\widetilde{R}]. By the proof of [7 Theorem 3.3.1 p. 317], the subgroup S~ncN\widetilde{S}_{nc}N is closed, is isomorphic to the semidirect product N⋊S~ncN\rtimes\widetilde{S}_{nc}, and the pair (N⋊S~nc,N)(N\rtimes\widetilde{S}_{nc},N) has relative property (T). In particular, NN is closed. It is connected and contained in the solvable group R~\widetilde{R}, hence is amenable by [2 Corollary G.2.3 p. 426].

Consider the continuous homomorphism

Q:N⋊S~nc→G,Q(n,s):=p(ns).Q:N\rtimes\widetilde{S}_{nc}\to G,\qquad Q(n,s)\mathrel{\mathop:}=p(ns).

The target GG is σ\sigma-compact, since it is a connected Lie group. Thus [32 Proposition 13 p. 698] implies that Q(N)Q(N) is relatively compact. Its closure W:=p(N)‾W\mathrel{\mathop:}= \overline{p(N)} is a compact connected subgroup of the closed solvable radical of GG. A compact connected solvable Lie group is a torus: its Lie algebra is both reductive and solvable, hence abelian, by [5 Chapter IX, Section 1.3, Proposition 1 p. 283], and the connected group is then abelian. The group p(S~nc)p(\widetilde{S}_{nc}) normalizes WW. Its action on the lattice Ker⁡(exp⁡W)\operatorname{Ker}(\exp_W) is constant along paths, since this lattice is discrete. This lattice spans the Lie algebra of the torus WW, so the connected group p(S~nc)p(\widetilde{S}_{nc}) centralizes WW.

The Lie algebra of WW contains [snc,r][\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{r}]. Consequently [snc,[snc,r]]={0}[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{r}]]=\{0\}. Since the semisimple algebra snc\mathfrak{s}_{nc} is perfect, the Jacobi identity gives

[snc,r]=[[snc,snc],r]⊂[snc,[snc,r]]={0}.[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{r}]=[[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{s}_{nc}],\mathfrak{r}]\subset[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{r}]]=\{0\}.

This proves the required commutation condition without assuming weak amenability of G~\widetilde{G}.

In particular, the implication from ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1 to the Haagerup property for connected Lie groups is already a consequence of published results. Indeed, weak amenability implies the approximation property, and [20 Theorem C and the preceding paragraph, pp. 928–930] then excludes simple Levi ideals of real rank at least two. The factors of type sp(1,m)\mathfrak{sp}(1,m) with m≥2m\ge2 and f4(−20)\mathfrak{f}_{4(-20)} have simply connected groups with finite centre by [19 proof of Theorem C p. 6962]. Their images in GG have finite centre and are closed by Lemma 3.1. Their constants, respectively 2m−12m-1 and 2121, contradict ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1 by [12 Proposition 1.3(a) p. 512] and [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102]. The remaining non-compact simple factors are locally isomorphic to SO0(1,m)\mathrm{SO}_{0}(1,m) or SU(m)\mathrm{SU}(m) and commute with the radical. The group GG therefore has the Haagerup property by [6 Theorem 4.0.1 p. 41]. The converse implication and the general product formula below use the upper bound established in § 4.

Covariant positive definite functions and central lifting

Throughout this section all locally compact groups are second countable. We fix a group GG, a closed central subgroup ZZ, and the quotient map q:G→G/Zq:G\to G/Z. We write Z^\widehat{Z} for the dual group, with Haar measure dχ\mathrm{d}\chi, and use the Fourier transform h^(z):=∫Z^h(χ)χ(z) dχ\widehat{h}(z)\mathrel{\mathop:}= \int_{\widehat{Z}}h(\chi)\chi(z)\,\mathrm{d}\chi, where z∈Zz\in Z.

The families below are taken from the generalized Haagerup property of [6 Definition 4.2.1 p. 47]. We retain the covariance and continuity requirements, which are the ones needed to lift weak amenability.

Definition 4.1 Let GG be a locally compact group and ZZ be a closed central subgroup of GG. We say that the pair (G,Z)(G,Z) has the covariant approximation property if for any compact subset KK of GG and any ε>0\varepsilon> 0 there exist a compact neighbourhood VV of the trivial character in Z^\widehat{Z} and a family (φχ)χ∈V(\varphi_\chi)_{\chi\in V} of elements of P1(G)P_1(G) satisfying the following conditions.

  1. For any x∈Kx \in K and any χ∈V\chi\in V, we have ∣φχ(x)−1∣<ε|\varphi_\chi(x)-1| < \varepsilon.

  1. For any χ∈V\chi\in V, any x∈Gx \in G and any z∈Zz \in Z, we have φχ(xz)=φχ(x)χ(z)\varphi_\chi(xz)=\varphi_\chi(x)\chi(z).

  1. The map V×G→CV \times G \to\mathbb{C}, (χ,x)↦φχ(x)(\chi,x) \mapsto\varphi_\chi(x) is continuous.

The generalized Haagerup property requires in addition that ∣φχ∣|\varphi_\chi| vanish at infinity on G/ZG/Z. That additional condition will not be used. Recall also that, if qN:G→G/Nq_N:G \to G/N is a quotient by a closed normal subgroup and K′K' is a compact subset of G/NG/N, there exists a compact subset KK of GG such that qN(K)=K′q_N(K)=K', by [2 Lemma B.1.1 p. 324].

Lemma 4.2 Let GG be a locally compact group and ZZ be a closed central subgroup of GG.

  1. If ZZ is compact, then (G,Z)(G,Z) has the covariant approximation property.

  1. If GG is amenable, then (G,Z)(G,Z) has the covariant approximation property.

  1. If GG is the universal covering group of SU⁡(1,n)\operatorname{SU}(1,n) for some n≥1n \ge1 and if ZZ is the centre of GG, then (G,Z)(G,Z) has the covariant approximation property.

  1. If (G1,Z1)(G_1,Z_1) and (G2,Z2)(G_2,Z_2) have the covariant approximation property, then so does (G1×G2,Z1×Z2)(G_1 \times G_2,Z_1 \times Z_2).

  1. If (G,Z)(G,Z) has the covariant approximation property and if Z0Z_0 is a closed subgroup of ZZ, then (G/Z0,Z/Z0)(G/Z_0,Z/Z_0) has the covariant approximation property.

Proof: Points 4 and 5 are [6 Lemmas 4.2.4 p. 48 and 4.2.8 p. 50], whose proofs do not use the vanishing condition. We include the details for completeness.

  1. Since ZZ is compact, its dual group Z^\widehat{Z} is discrete by [23 Theorem 23.17 p. 362], so that V:={1}V \mathrel{\mathop:}= \{1\} is a compact neighbourhood of the trivial character. The constant function φ1=1\varphi_1=1 satisfies the three conditions of Definition 4.1.

  1. By [6 Proposition 4.2.12 p. 54], the pair (G,Z)(G,Z) has the generalized Haagerup property, hence the covariant approximation property.

  1. The pair (G,Z)(G,Z) has the generalized Haagerup property by [6 Proposition 4.2.14 p. 59]. The analytic input of this result is the positive definiteness of some covariant spherical functions of Flensted-Jensen on a central extension of PU⁡(n,1)\operatorname{PU}(n,1) by R\mathbb{R} which contains the universal covering group of SU⁡(1,n)\operatorname{SU}(1,n) as a closed subgroup, see [6 Section 4.2.5 pp. 57–59], [17 Theorem 2.7 p. 77 and Remark 2.8 p. 78] and [21 Proposition 22 p. 462 and Remark 24 pp. 464–465].

  1. Let KK be a compact subset of G1×G2G_1 \times G_2 and ε>0\varepsilon> 0. The projections K1K_1 and K2K_2 of KK are compact and K⊂K1×K2K \subset K_1 \times K_2. Let ViV_i and (φχ(i))χ∈Vi(\varphi_\chi^{(i)})_{\chi\in V_i} be given by Definition 4.1 for (Gi,Zi)(G_i,Z_i), KiK_i and ε2\frac{\varepsilon}{2}. We identify the dual group of Z1×Z2Z_1 \times Z_2 with Z^1×Z^2\widehat{Z}_1 \times\widehat{Z}_2 by [23 Theorem 23.18 pp. 362–363]. Then V1×V2V_1 \times V_2 is a compact neighbourhood of the trivial character, and the

functions φ(χ1,χ2)(x1,x2)=defφχ1(1)(x1)φχ2(2)(x2)\varphi_{(\chi_1,\chi_2)}(x_1,x_2) \mathrel{\overset{\mathrm{def}}{=}} \varphi_{\chi_1}^{(1)}(x_1)\varphi_{\chi_2}^{(2)}(x_2) belong to P1(G1×G2)P_1(G_1 \times G_2), since they are coefficients of tensor products of representations. Conditions 2 and 3 are clear, and condition 1 follows from ∣ab−1∣≤∣a∣∣b−1∣+∣a−1∣≤∣b−1∣+∣a−1∣|ab-1| \leq|a||b-1|+|a-1| \leq|b-1|+|a-1| for complex numbers a,ba,b with ∣a∣≤1|a| \leq1.

  1. Let q0:G→G/Z0q_0:G \to G/Z_0 be the quotient map, K′K' be a compact subset of G/Z0G/Z_0 and ε>0\varepsilon>0. Let KK be a compact subset of GG with q0(K)=K′q_0(K)=K' and let VV and (φχ)χ∈V(\varphi_\chi)_{\chi\in V} be given by Definition 4.1 for KK and ε\varepsilon. The annihilator Z0⊥=def{χ∈Z^:χ∣Z0=1}Z_0^\perp\mathrel{\overset{\mathrm{def}}{=}} \{\chi\in\widehat{Z}:\chi|_{Z_0}=1\} is a closed subgroup of Z^\widehat{Z} by [23 Definition 23.23 and Remark 23.24(c) p. 365]. Pullback along Z→Z/Z0Z \to Z/Z_0 identifies Z/Z0^\widehat{Z/Z_0} topologically with Z0⊥Z_0^\perp by [23 Theorem 23.25 p. 365]. Thus V′=defV∩Z0⊥V' \mathrel{\overset{\mathrm{def}}{=}} V \cap Z_0^\perp is a compact neighbourhood of the trivial character in Z/Z0^\widehat{Z/Z_0}. For χ∈V′\chi\in V', the function φχ\varphi_\chi is constant on the cosets of Z0Z_0 by condition 2, hence of the form φχ′∘q0\varphi'_\chi\circ q_0, where φχ′\varphi'_\chi is a positive definite function on G/Z0G/Z_0 with φχ′(e)=1\varphi'_\chi(e)=1, continuous since q0q_0 is open. Conditions 1 and 2 for the family (φχ′)χ∈V′(\varphi'_\chi)_{\chi\in V'}, the pair (G/Z0,Z/Z0^)(G/Z_0,\widehat{Z/Z_0}) and the compact set K′K' are clear. Let Q0:V′×G→V′×G/Z0Q_0:V' \times G \to V' \times G/Z_0 be the map (χ,x)↦(χ,q0(x))(\chi,x) \mapsto(\chi,q_0(x)). The image of a basic open set U×OU \times O is U×q0(O)U \times q_0(O), which is open because q0q_0 is open. Thus Q0Q_0 is a continuous open surjection, hence a quotient map. The function (χ,xZ0)↦φχ′(xZ0)(\chi,xZ_0) \mapsto\varphi'_\chi(xZ_0) is continuous by [16 Proposition 2.4.2 p. 90], since its composition with Q0Q_0 is the continuous function (χ,x)↦φχ(x)(\chi,x) \mapsto\varphi_\chi(x). This proves condition 3.

Averaging a covariant family over central characters is the device used in [6 Lemma 4.2.11 pp. 52–53] to deduce the Haagerup property from the generalized Haagerup property. It also appears in Hansen’s proof for the universal covering group of the group SU(1,n)\mathrm{SU}(1,n) [21 Lemma 30 pp. 468–469 and Definition 31 p. 469]. Knudby pointed out in [33 p. 105] that the inequality ΛWA(G)≤ΛWA(G/Z)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) \leq\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z), known for discrete groups GG and central subgroups ZZ, was not available for non-discrete groups, and that such an inequality would considerably simplify the characterization of weak amenability for connected Lie groups. Proposition 4.6 provides it under the covariant approximation property. The next two lemmas provide the Fourier algebra assertion needed for this purpose.

Lemma 4.3 Let ZZ be a second countable locally compact abelian group and σ\sigma be a unitary representation of ZZ on H\mathcal{H}. Let EE be the projection-valued measure on Z^\widehat{Z} associated with σ\sigma by the SNAG theorem [2 Theorem D.3.1 p. 375]. If E(B)=0E(B)=0 for every Haar null Borel subset BB of Z^\widehat{Z}, then σ\sigma is equivalent to a subrepresentation of a direct sum of copies of λZ\lambda_Z.

Proof. For ξ∈H\xi\in\mathcal{H}, the finite measure μξ(B)=def∥E(B)ξ∥H2\mu_\xi(B) \mathrel{\overset{\mathrm{def}}{=}} \|E(B)\xi\|_{\mathcal{H}}^2 is absolutely continuous with respect to the Haar measure, which is σ\sigma-finite: the dual group Z^\widehat{Z} is second countable by [23 Theorem 24.14 p. 381], hence is σ\sigma-compact. By the Radon–Nikodym theorem, μξ=hξ dχ\mu_\xi=h_\xi\,\mathrm{d}\chi with hξ∈L1(Z^)h_\xi\in L^1(\widehat{Z}) non-negative.

The cyclic representation generated by ξ\xi identifies with multiplication by the characters on L2(Z^,μξ)L^2(\widehat{Z},\mu_\xi). The map f↦fhξ1/2f \mapsto fh_\xi^{1/2} embeds it isometrically into the Hilbert space L2(Z^)L^2(\widehat{Z}) and intertwines these multiplication operators. By Plancherel’s theorem [2 Theorem D.1.2 and Remark D.1.4 p. 371], the latter representation is equivalent to λZ\lambda_Z. Finally, [2 Proposition C.4.9 p. 354] decomposes H\mathcal{H} into mutually orthogonal cyclic subrepresentations. Applying the preceding embedding to each summand proves the assertion.

:::

Lemma 4.4 Let GG be a locally compact group, ZZ be a closed central subgroup of GG and q:G→G/Zq:G \to G/Z be the quotient map. Let Ψ∈P(G)\Psi\in P(G) and suppose that the restriction to ZZ of the representation πΨ\pi_\Psi is equivalent to a subrepresentation of a direct sum of copies of λZ\lambda_Z. Then for any u∈A(G/Z)u \in A(G/Z), the function (u∘q)Ψ(u \circ q)\Psi belongs to A(G)A(G) and

∥(u∘q)Ψ∥A(G)≤∥u∥A(G/Z)Ψ(e).\|(u \circ q)\Psi\|_{A(G)} \leq\|u\|_{A(G/Z)}\Psi(e).

Proof: Let δ>0\delta> 0 and f,g∈L2(G/Z)f,g \in L^2(G/Z) with u(y˙)=⟨λy˙f,g⟩L2(G/Z)u(\dot{y}) = \langle\lambda_{\dot{y}}f,g\rangle_{L^2(G/Z)} for any y˙∈G/Z\dot{y} \in G/Z and

∥f∥L2(G/Z)∥g∥L2(G/Z)≤∥u∥A(G/Z)+δ.\|f\|_{L^2(G/Z)}\|g\|_{L^2(G/Z)} \leq\|u\|_{A(G/Z)}+\delta.

Since the Haar measure of G/ZG/Z is GG-invariant, the representation ρ≔λG/Z∘q\rho\coloneqq\lambda_{G/Z} \circ q is the quasi-regular representation of GG on the Hilbert space L2(G/Z)L^2(G/Z), that is the representation Ind⁡ZG1Z\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G 1_Z induced by the trivial representation of ZZ [2 Example E.1.8 (ii) p. 388]. For any s∈Gs \in G, we have

(u∘q)(s)Ψ(s)=⟨(ρ⊗πΨ)(s)(f⊗ξΨ),g⊗ξΨ⟩.(u \circ q)(s)\Psi(s)=\langle(\rho\otimes\pi_\Psi)(s)(f\otimes\xi_\Psi),g\otimes\xi_\Psi\rangle.

By [2 Corollary E.2.6 (i) p. 391], the representation πΨ⊗ρ\pi_\Psi\otimes\rho, hence ρ⊗πΨ\rho\otimes\pi_\Psi, is equivalent to Ind⁡ZG(πΨ∣Z)\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G(\pi_\Psi|_Z). By assumption, there exist a set JJ and a representation σ′\sigma' of ZZ such that πΨ∣Z⊕σ′\pi_\Psi|_Z\oplus\sigma' is equivalent to ⨁j∈JλZ\bigoplus_{j\in J}\lambda_Z. By [2 Propositions E.2.1 and E.2.2 p. 389], the representation Ind⁡ZG(πΨ∣Z)⊕Ind⁡ZGσ′\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G(\pi_\Psi|_Z)\oplus\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G\sigma' is equivalent to ⨁j∈JInd⁡ZGλZ\bigoplus_{j\in J}\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G\lambda_Z. By [2 Example E.1.8 (i) p. 388 and Theorem E.2.4 p. 390], we have Ind⁡ZGλZ=Ind⁡ZGInd⁡{e}Z1≃Ind⁡{e}G1=λG\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G\lambda_Z=\operatorname{Ind}_Z^G\operatorname{Ind}_{\{e\}}^Z1\simeq\operatorname{Ind}_{\{e\}}^G1=\lambda_G. Consequently, there exists an isometry W:L2(G/Z)⊗2HΨ→⨁j∈JL2(G)W:L^2(G/Z)\otimes_2 H_\Psi\to\bigoplus_{j\in J}L^2(G) such that W(ρ⊗πΨ)(s)=(⨁j∈Jλs)WW(\rho\otimes\pi_\Psi)(s)=(\bigoplus_{j\in J}\lambda_s)W for any s∈Gs\in G. Write W(f⊗ξΨ)=(aj)j∈JW(f\otimes\xi_\Psi)=(a_j)_{j\in J} and W(g⊗ξΨ)=(bj)j∈JW(g\otimes\xi_\Psi)=(b_j)_{j\in J}. Then

(u∘q)(s)Ψ(s)=∑j∈J⟨λsaj,bj⟩L2(G),s∈G.(u\circ q)(s)\Psi(s)=\sum_{j\in J}\langle\lambda_sa_j,b_j\rangle_{L^2(G)},\qquad s\in G.

Each function s↦⟨λsaj,bj⟩L2(G)s\mapsto\langle\lambda_sa_j,b_j\rangle_{L^2(G)} belongs to the Fourier algebra A(G)A(G) with norm at most ∥aj∥L2(G)∥bj∥L2(G)\|a_j\|_{L^2(G)}\|b_j\|_{L^2(G)} and, by the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality,

∑j∈J∥aj∥L2(G)∥bj∥L2(G)≤∥f⊗ξΨ∥∥g⊗ξΨ∥=∥f∥L2(G/Z)∥g∥L2(G/Z)Ψ(e).\sum_{j\in J}\|a_j\|_{L^2(G)}\|b_j\|_{L^2(G)} \leq\|f\otimes\xi_\Psi\|\|g\otimes\xi_\Psi\| =\|f\|_{L^2(G/Z)}\|g\|_{L^2(G/Z)}\Psi(e).

Since A(G)A(G) is a Banach space and ∥⋅∥∞≤∥⋅∥A(G)\|\cdot\|_\infty\leq\|\cdot\|_{A(G)}, the series converges in A(G)A(G) to (u∘q)Ψ(u\circ q)\Psi, and ∥(u∘q)Ψ∥A(G)≤(∥u∥A(G/Z)+δ)Ψ(e)\|(u\circ q)\Psi\|_{A(G)}\leq(\|u\|_{A(G/Z)}+\delta)\Psi(e). We let δ→0\delta\to0.

Remark 4.5 The assumption in Lemma 4.4 cannot be replaced by weak containment. For example, take G=Z=RG=Z=\mathbb{R}, Ψ=1\Psi=1 and u=1u=1 on G/Z={e}G/Z=\{e\}. The trivial representation of R\mathbb{R} is weakly contained in λR\lambda_{\mathbb{R}} by [2 Theorem G.3.2 p. 430], whereas (u∘q)Ψ=1∉A(R)(u\circ q)\Psi=1\notin A(\mathbb{R}), since A(R)⊂C0(R)A(\mathbb{R})\subset C_0(\mathbb{R}).

Proposition 4.6 Let GG be a second countable locally compact group and ZZ be a closed central subgroup of GG. If (G,Z)(G,Z) has the covariant approximation property, then

ΛWA(G)≤ΛWA(G/Z).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)\leq\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z).

Proof: Fix a compact subset KK of GG and ε>0\varepsilon>0. Take VV and (φχ)χ∈V(\varphi_\chi)_{\chi\in V} as in Definition 4.1. Choose a non-negative continuous function ω\omega on Z^\widehat{Z} with compact support in the interior of VV and integral one. Extend ω(χ)φχ(x)\omega(\chi)\varphi_\chi(x) by zero outside V×GV\times G and put

hx(χ)≔ω(χ)φχ(x)andΨ(x)≔∫Z^hx(χ) dχ.(11)h_x(\chi)\coloneqq\omega(\chi)\varphi_\chi(x)\quad\text{and}\quad\Psi(x)\coloneqq\int_{\widehat{Z}}h_x(\chi)\,d\chi. \tag*{(11)}

Fix x0∈Gx_0\in G. Joint continuity and compactness of VV give

sup⁡χ∈V∣φχ(x)−φχ(x0)∣⟶0as x→x0.\sup_{\chi\in V}|\varphi_\chi(x)-\varphi_\chi(x_0)|\longrightarrow0\quad\text{as }x\to x_0.

Indeed, for any η>0\eta> 0, continuity at each (χ,x0)(\chi, x_0) gives a neighbourhood VχV_\chi of χ\chi in VV and a neighbourhood UχU_\chi of x0x_0 such that ∣φχ′(x)−φχ′(x0)∣<η|\varphi_{\chi'}(x) - \varphi_{\chi'}(x_0)| < \eta for χ′∈Vχ\chi' \in V_\chi and x∈Uχx \in U_\chi. We choose finitely many VχV_\chi covering VV and intersect the corresponding UχU_\chi. Since ∫Z^ω(χ) dχ=1\int_{\widehat{Z}} \omega(\chi)\,d\chi= 1, we obtain

∥hx−hx0∥L1(Z^)≤sup⁡χ∈V∣φχ(x)−φχ(x0)∣→0.\|h_x-h_{x_0}\|_{L^1(\widehat{Z})} \leq\sup_{\chi\in V}|\varphi_\chi(x)-\varphi_\chi(x_0)| \to0.

Hence Ψ\Psi is continuous. Integrating the finite positive-definiteness inequalities shows that Ψ∈P1(G)\Psi\in P_1(G), and

∣Ψ(x)−1∣≤∫Z^ω(χ)∣φχ(x)−1∣ dχ<ε,x∈K.(12)|\Psi(x)-1| \leq\int_{\widehat{Z}}\omega(\chi)|\varphi_\chi(x)-1|\,d\chi< \varepsilon,\quad x\in K. \tag*{(12)}

Let EE be the spectral measure of πΨ∣Z\pi_\Psi|_Z. By covariance, we have

Ψ(z)=∫Z^ω(χ)χ(z) dχ=ω^(z),z∈Z.\Psi(z)=\int_{\widehat{Z}}\omega(\chi)\chi(z)\,d\chi=\widehat{\omega}(z),\quad z\in Z.

Uniqueness of the Fourier–Stieltjes transform [2 Section D.1 pp. 370–371] gives

∥E(B)ξΨ∥2=∫Bω(χ) dχ\|E(B)\xi_\Psi\|^2=\int_B\omega(\chi)\,d\chi

for any Borel set B⊂Z^B\subset\widehat{Z}. By centrality and [2 Theorem D.3.1(i) p. 375], every E(B)E(B) commutes with πΨ(G)\pi_\Psi(G). If BB is Haar null, then E(B)ξΨ=0E(B)\xi_\Psi=0, hence E(B)πΨ(s)ξΨ=0E(B)\pi_\Psi(s)\xi_\Psi=0 for any s∈Gs\in G. Since ξΨ\xi_\Psi is cyclic, we obtain E(B)=0E(B)=0. Lemma 4.3 embeds πΨ∣Z\pi_\Psi|_Z in a direct sum of copies of λZ\lambda_Z.

We may suppose L≔ΛWA(G/Z)<∞L \coloneqq\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z)<\infty. For δ>0\delta>0, choose a function u∈A(G/Z)u\in A(G/Z) with ∥u∥B2(G/Z)≤L+δ\|u\|_{B_2(G/Z)}\leq L+\delta and ∣u−1∣<ε|u-1|<\varepsilon on q(K)q(K). Lemma 4.4 gives w≔(u∘q)Ψ∈A(G)w\coloneqq(u\circ q)\Psi\in A(G). By (5), (6) and the Banach algebra inequality, we obtain

∥w∥B2(G)=∥(u∘q)Ψ∥B2(G)≤∥u∘q∥B2(G)∥Ψ∥B2(G)≤L+δ.\|w\|_{B_2(G)}=\|(u\circ q)\Psi\|_{B_2(G)}\leq\|u\circ q\|_{B_2(G)}\|\Psi\|_{B_2(G)}\leq L+\delta.

For any x∈Kx\in K, we have

∣w(x)−1∣≤∣u(q(x))−1∣∣Ψ(x)∣+∣Ψ(x)−1∣<2ε.(13)|w(x)-1|\leq|u(q(x))-1||\Psi(x)|+|\Psi(x)-1|<2\varepsilon. \tag*{(13)}

Since K,ε,δK,\varepsilon,\delta are arbitrary, this proves the assertion. ■

Remark 4.7 Let S~\widetilde{S} be the universal covering group of SU(1,n)\mathrm{SU}(1,n) with n≥1n\geq1. The third point of Lemma 4.2 and Proposition 4.6 give ΛWA(S~)≤ΛWA(S~/Z(S~))=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\widetilde{S})\leq\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\widetilde{S}/Z(\widetilde{S}))=1, the last equality by [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102], since S~/Z(S~)\widetilde{S}/Z(\widetilde{S}) has trivial centre. This recovers Hansen’s theorem [21], as anticipated in [33 p. 105]. Note also that the proof of Proposition 4.6 only uses, for any compact subset KK of GG and any ε>0\varepsilon>0, a function Ψ∈P1(G)\Psi\in P_1(G) with ∣Ψ−1∣<ε|\Psi-1|<\varepsilon on KK such that πΨ∣Z\pi_\Psi|_Z is equivalent to a subrepresentation of a direct sum of copies of λZ\lambda_Z.

The product formula for connected Lie groups

We retain the Levi decomposition and the notation SiS_i from the introduction. Let IncI_{\mathrm{nc}} be the indices of the non-compact simple ideals, let sc\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{c}} be the sum of the compact ones and let snc\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{nc}} be the sum of the others. The closedness statement of Lemma 3.1 will be used for the lower bound.

Lemma 5.1 Let GG be a connected Lie group. Suppose that for any i∈Inci \in I_{nc}, the ideal si\mathfrak{s}_i has real rank one and satisfies [si,r]=0[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]=0. Let m≔r⋊sc\mathfrak{m} \coloneqq\mathfrak{r} \rtimes\mathfrak{s}_c.

  1. The subspace m\mathfrak{m} is an ideal of g\mathfrak{g} and g=m⊕snc\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{m}\oplus\mathfrak{s}_{nc} is a direct sum of ideals.

  1. Let M~\widetilde{M} and S~i\widetilde{S}_i be the simply connected Lie groups with Lie algebras m\mathfrak{m} and si\mathfrak{s}_i. Then the universal covering group G~\widetilde{G} of GG is isomorphic to M~×∏i∈IncS~i\widetilde{M}\times\prod_{i\in I_{nc}}\widetilde{S}_i, and M~\widetilde{M} is amenable.

  1. The pair (G,Z(G))(G,Z(G)) has the covariant approximation property.

  1. The topological groups G/Z(G)G/Z(G) and M~/Z(M~)×∏i∈IncS~i/Z(S~i)\widetilde{M}/Z(\widetilde{M})\times\prod_{i\in I_{nc}}\widetilde{S}_i/Z(\widetilde{S}_i) are isomorphic.

Proof. 1. We have [r,g]⊂r[\mathfrak{r},\mathfrak{g}]\subset\mathfrak{r} and [sc,g]⊂[sc,r]+[sc,s]⊂r+sc[\mathfrak{s}_c,\mathfrak{g}]\subset[\mathfrak{s}_c,\mathfrak{r}]+[\mathfrak{s}_c,\mathfrak{s}]\subset\mathfrak{r}+\mathfrak{s}_c, so that m\mathfrak{m} is an ideal. By assumption, [snc,r]=0[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{r}]=0, and [snc,sc]=0[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{s}_c]=0, so that [snc,m]=0[\mathfrak{s}_{nc},\mathfrak{m}]=0.

  1. The group M~×∏i∈IncS~i\widetilde{M}\times\prod_{i\in I_{nc}}\widetilde{S}_i is connected and simply connected, with Lie algebra isomorphic to m⊕snc=g\mathfrak{m}\oplus\mathfrak{s}_{nc}=\mathfrak{g}. By the integrability theorem [HiN12, Theorem 9.5.9 p. 340], applied to an isomorphism of Lie algebras and to its inverse, it is isomorphic to G~\widetilde{G}. The group M~\widetilde{M} is the semidirect product of its simply connected solvable radical by the simply connected group with Lie algebra sc\mathfrak{s}_c [4 Chapter III, Section 9.8, Proposition 31 p. 356]. The latter group is compact by Weyl’s theorem [HiN12, Theorem 12.1.17 p. 467]. Thus M~\widetilde{M} is an extension of a compact group by a solvable normal subgroup, and is amenable by [2 Corollary G.2.3 p. 426].

  1. By Lemma 4.2, the pair (M~,Z(M~))(\widetilde{M},Z(\widetilde{M})) has the covariant approximation property. Let i∈Inci\in I_{nc}. If si\mathfrak{s}_i is isomorphic to some su(1,m)\mathfrak{su}(1,m) with m≥1m\ge1, the pair (S~i,Z(S~i))(\widetilde{S}_i,Z(\widetilde{S}_i)) has the covariant approximation property by the third point of Lemma 4.2. Otherwise, since so(1,2)≃su(1,1)\mathfrak{so}(1,2)\simeq\mathfrak{su}(1,1), the Lie algebra si\mathfrak{s}_i is isomorphic to so(1,m)\mathfrak{so}(1,m) for some m≥3m\ge3, to sp(1,m)\mathfrak{sp}(1,m) for some m≥2m\ge2 or to f4(−20)\mathfrak{f}_4(-20), see [19 proof of Theorem C p. 6962]. In these cases the compact subalgebra ki\mathfrak{k}_i in a Cartan decomposition is respectively so(m)\mathfrak{so}(m), sp(m)⊕sp(1)\mathfrak{sp}(m)\oplus\mathfrak{sp}(1) or so(9)\mathfrak{so}(9), and is semisimple, see [30 Appendix C.3 pp. 700–703 and C.4 p. 717], with the case so(1,3)≃sl(2,C)\mathfrak{so}(1,3)\simeq\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{C}) given by (6.110) p. 426 of the same reference. Let KiK_i be the connected analytic subgroup of S~i\widetilde{S}_i with Lie algebra ki\mathfrak{k}_i. It is compact by [5 Chapter IX, Section 1.4, Theorem 1 p. 284], and it contains the centre of S~i\widetilde{S}_i by [30 Theorem 6.31(e) p. 362]. This centre is discrete and closed, hence finite. We conclude with the first point of Lemma 4.2. Since Z(G~)=Z(M~)×∏i∈IncZ(S~i)Z(\widetilde{G})=Z(\widetilde{M})\times\prod_{i\in I_{nc}}Z(\widetilde{S}_i), the pair (G~,Z(G~))(\widetilde{G},Z(\widetilde{G})) has the covariant approximation property by the fourth point of Lemma 4.2. Let p:G~→Gp:\widetilde{G}\to G be the covering homomorphism and D≔ker⁡pD\coloneqq\ker p, which is a discrete central subgroup. By [4 Chapter III, Section 9.8, Lemma 1 pp. 355–356], the centre of a connected group modulo a discrete central subgroup is the quotient of its centre. Applied to G~\widetilde{G} and DD, this gives p−1(Z(G))=Z(G~)p^{-1}(Z(G))=Z(\widetilde{G}). Thus the covering homomorphism identifies G~/D\widetilde{G}/D with G~/Z(G~)\widetilde{G}/Z(\widetilde{G}) and GG with Z(G)/Z(G~)/DZ(G)/Z(\widetilde{G})/D. We conclude with the fifth point of Lemma 4.2. This is the argument of [6 Section 4.2.8 pp. 60–61], without the vanishing condition.

  1. Since D⊂Z(G~)D\subset Z(\widetilde{G}), transitivity of quotients [3 Chapter III, Section 2.7, Corollary to Proposition 22 p. 235] gives

G/Z(G)≃(G~/D)/(Z(G~)/D)≃G~/Z(G~).G/Z(G)\simeq(\widetilde{G}/D)/(Z(\widetilde{G})/D)\simeq\widetilde{G}/Z(\widetilde{G}).

The centre of a product is the product of the centres. Applying this to the decomposition in the second point proves the fourth point. ■

Now, we prove Theorem 1.

Theorem 1 Let g=r⋊s\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{r}\rtimes\mathfrak{s} be a Levi decomposition of the Lie algebra g\mathfrak{g} of a connected Lie group GG, with radical r\mathfrak{r}. Write s=s1⊕⋯⊕sn\mathfrak{s}=\mathfrak{s}_1\oplus\cdots\oplus\mathfrak{s}_n as a sum of simple ideals. Let SiS_i be the connected

analytic subgroup of GG with Lie algebra si\mathfrak{s}_i. Then GG is weakly amenable if and only if each si\mathfrak{s}_i is compact, or has real rank one and satisfies [si,r]=0[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]=0. In this case, we have

ΛWA(G)=∏i=1nΛWA(Si).(14)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=\prod_{i=1}^{n}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i). \tag*{(14)}

Consequently, the constant ΛWA\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}} is invariant under local isomorphism of connected Lie groups.

Proof: Assume first that every simple ideal is compact, or has real rank one and commutes with r\mathfrak{r}.

Upper bound. By Lemma 5.1 and Proposition 4.6, we have ΛWA(G)≤ΛWA(G/Z(G))\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)\leq\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z(G)). By Lemma 5.1 and [12 Corollary 1.5 p. 514], we have

ΛWA(G/Z(G))=ΛWA(M~/Z(M~))∏i∈IncΛWA(S~i/Z(S~i)).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z(G))=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\widetilde{M}/Z(\widetilde{M}))\prod_{i\in I_{nc}}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\widetilde{S}_i/Z(\widetilde{S}_i)).

The group M~/Z(M~)\widetilde{M}/Z(\widetilde{M}) is amenable by [2 Proposition G.2.2(i) p. 425], since it is a quotient of the amenable group M~\widetilde{M} by a closed normal subgroup. Hence ΛWA(M~/Z(M~))=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\widetilde{M}/Z(\widetilde{M}))=1. For i∈Inci\in I_{nc}, the group S~i/Z(S~i)\widetilde{S}_i/Z(\widetilde{S}_i) is a connected simple Lie group with Lie algebra si\mathfrak{s}_i, so that ΛWA(S~i/Z(S~i))=ΛWA(Si)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\widetilde{S}_i/Z(\widetilde{S}_i))=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i) by [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102]. Since ΛWA(Si)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i)=1 if si\mathfrak{s}_i is compact, we obtain ΛWA(G)≤∏i=1nΛWA(Si)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)\leq\prod_{i=1}^{n}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i).

Lower bound. Empty products are understood to be 1. If there are no simple factors with constant greater than 1, the lower bound is simply ΛWA(G)≥1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)\geq1. Otherwise, let IFI_F be the set of indices ii such that si\mathfrak{s}_i is isomorphic to the Lie algebra sp(1,m)\mathfrak{sp}(1,m), for some m≥2m\geq2 or to f4(−20)\mathfrak{f}_4(-20), and let SFS_F be the connected Lie subgroup of GG with Lie algebra sF≔⨁i∈IFsi\mathfrak{s}_F\coloneqq\bigoplus_{i\in I_F}\mathfrak{s}_i. The simply connected Lie group ∏i∈IFS~i\prod_{i\in I_F}\widetilde{S}_i with Lie algebra sF\mathfrak{s}_F has finite centre, see [19 proof of Theorem C p. 6962], and SFS_F is its quotient by a discrete central subgroup. As in the proof of Lemma 5.1, the centre of SFS_F is the image of the centre of ∏i∈IFS~i\prod_{i\in I_F}\widetilde{S}_i, hence is finite, and SF/Z(SF)S_F/Z(S_F) is isomorphic to ∏i∈IFS~i/Z(S~i)\prod_{i\in I_F}\widetilde{S}_i/Z(\widetilde{S}_i). By Lemma 3.1, the subgroup SFS_F is closed in GG. Using [12 Proposition 1.3 p. 512], [12 Corollary 1.5 p. 514] and [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102], we obtain

ΛWA(G)≥ΛWA(SF)=ΛWA(SF/Z(SF))=∏i∈IFΛWA(Si)=∏i=1nΛWA(Si),\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)\geq\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_F)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_F/Z(S_F))=\prod_{i\in I_F}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i)=\prod_{i=1}^{n}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i),

since ΛWA(Si)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i)=1 for i∉IFi\notin I_F.

Conversely, weak amenability implies the stated condition by Corollary 3.3.

The last assertion follows, since the right-hand side of (2) and the weak amenability criterion only depend on g\mathfrak{g}.

Example 5.2 Let HH be the universal covering group of the group SL(2,R)\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{R}), let zz generate its infinite cyclic centre, and fix θ∈R∖Q\theta\in\mathbb{R}\setminus\mathbb{Q}. Following the construction of [25 Example 10.33 pp. 442–443], also used in [33 Example 5.2 p. 112], set

D≔{(−m−nθ,zm,zn):m,n∈Z}andG≔(R×H×H)/D.D\coloneqq\{(-m-n\theta,z^m,z^n):m,n\in\mathbb{Z}\}\quad\text{and}\quad G\coloneqq(\mathbb{R}\times H\times H)/D.

The subgroup DD is central, closed and discrete: it is the graph of a map from the closed discrete subgroup Z(H)×Z(H)Z(H)\times Z(H) to R\mathbb{R}. Hence GG is a connected Lie group with Lie algebra R⊕sl(2,R)⊕sl(2,R)\mathbb{R}\oplus\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{R})\oplus\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{R}).

Let q:R×H×H→Gq : \mathbb{R} \times H \times H \to G be the quotient homomorphism. The analytic Levi subgroup is S≔q({0}×H×H)S \coloneqq q(\{0\} \times H \times H). Irrationality of θ\theta gives D∩({0}×H×H)={(0,e,e)}D \cap(\{0\} \times H \times H) = \{(0,e,e)\}, so SS, with its intrinsic Lie group topology, is isomorphic to H×HH \times H. However, we have

q−1(S)=(Z+θZ)×H×H.q^{-1}(S) = (\mathbb{Z} + \theta\mathbb{Z}) \times H \times H.

Since Z+θZ\mathbb{Z}+\theta\mathbb{Z} is dense and proper in R\mathbb{R}, the subgroup SS is dense and proper in GG, and is therefore not closed. Thus the restriction theorem for closed subgroups cannot be applied directly to this Levi subgroup.

Theorem 1 gives ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1, and Theorem 2 gives the Haagerup property. The value of the constant was already covered by [33 Theorem 5.4 p. 113], the example illustrates why closedness of the Levi subgroup cannot be assumed.

Example 5.3. The same construction can be carried out with HH the universal covering group of SU(1,2)\mathrm{SU}(1,2) and zz a generator of its infinite cyclic centre [6 Section 4.2.4 pp. 56–57]. The resulting group has Lie algebra R⊕su(1,2)⊕su(1,2)\mathbb{R} \oplus\mathfrak{su}(1,2) \oplus\mathfrak{su}(1,2) and fundamental group D≃Z2D \simeq\mathbb{Z}^2, since R×H×H\mathbb{R} \times H \times H is simply connected. As previously, D∩({0}×H×H)={e}D \cap(\{0\} \times H \times H) = \{e\} and the inverse image of the analytic Levi subgroup is (Z+θZ)×H×H(\mathbb{Z}+\theta\mathbb{Z})\times H\times H. Thus this Levi subgroup is dense and proper, and is isomorphic to H×HH \times H in its intrinsic topology. Theorem 1 gives ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1. This example is outside the assumptions of [11 Main Theorem p. 435], [32 Theorem 4 p. 691], and [33 Theorems 3.1 p. 102 and 5.4 p. 113].

Corollary 5.4. The finite values of ΛWA(G)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G), as GG ranges over connected Lie groups, are precisely the positive odd integers. In particular, every connected Lie group satisfies ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1 or ΛWA(G)≥3\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)\geq3.

Proof: By Theorem 1 and the simple group constants [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102], every finite value is a product of numbers 11, 2m−12m-1 with m≥2m\geq2, and 2121, hence is a positive odd integer. Conversely, the trivial group has constant one, and Sp⁡(1,m)\operatorname{Sp}(1,m) has constant 2m−12m-1 for every m≥2m\geq2. This realizes every positive odd integer.

Remark 5.5. The oddness of the constants in the previously classified cases was already noted in [Ver24, Remark 5.5 p. 16]. The present corollary extends this observation to all connected Lie groups.

Cowling's conjecture and amenable component groups

We prove both implications in Theorem 2. The reverse implication uses the known invariance (2.7).

Theorem 2. Let GG be a locally compact group such that G/G0G/G^0 is amenable. Then

ΛWA(G)=1⟺G has the Haagerup property.\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1 \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad G\text{ has the Haagerup property}.

In particular, Conjecture 1.1 holds for any connected Lie group and for any almost connected locally compact group.

Proof: Step 1: connected Lie groups. Suppose GG is a connected Lie group and ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=1. By Corollary 3.3, every non-compact simple ideal s\mathfrak{s} of a Levi subalgebra has real rank one and centralizes r\mathfrak{r}. If one of these ideals were isomorphic to sp(1,m)\mathfrak{sp}(1,m), m≥2m\geq2, or to f4(−20)\mathfrak{f}_4(-20), its

simply connected group would have finite centre [19 proof of Theorem C p. 6962]. The corresponding analytic subgroup SiS_i of GG, being a quotient of that group by a discrete central subgroup, also has finite centre and is closed by Lemma 3.1. Restriction and Theorem 1.2 would then give 1=ΛWA(G)≥ΛWA(Si)≥31 = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) \ge\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i) \ge3, a contradiction. Thus every non-compact simple Levi ideal is isomorphic to so(1,m)\mathfrak{so}(1,m) or su(1,m)\mathfrak{su}(1,m). Hence

g=(r⋊sc)⊕snc,\mathfrak{g} = (\mathfrak{r} \rtimes\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{c}}) \oplus\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{nc}},

where the simply connected group with Lie algebra r⋊sc\mathfrak{r} \rtimes\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{c}} is amenable, as in Lemma 5.1. Thus GG is locally isomorphic to a product of an amenable Lie group and groups SO0(1,m)\mathrm{SO}_0(1,m) and SU(1,m)\mathrm{SU}(1,m). The classification of [6 Theorem 4.0.1 p. 41] implies that the group GG has the Haagerup property. Conversely, that classification implies that a connected Lie group with the Haagerup property has precisely this Lie algebra form. Theorem 1 and the simple group constants then give ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = 1.

Step 2: connected locally compact groups. Let GG be connected and locally compact with ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = 1. By Gleason–Yamabe Theorem [8 Theorem 2.E.14 p. 46], there is a compact normal subgroup KK such that G/KG/K is a connected Lie group. Its weak amenability constant is one by (7). Step 1 gives the Haagerup property for G/KG/K. Pulling back the normalized positive definite approximants along the proper quotient map gives the Haagerup property for GG. Conversely, if GG has the Haagerup property, then so does G/KG/K, by the compact quotient argument in § 2. Step 1 and (7) give ΛWA(G)=ΛWA(G/K)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/K) = 1.

Step 3: second countable groups with amenable component quotient. Now, suppose that the group GG is second countable, ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = 1 and G/G0G/G^0 is amenable. The closed subgroup G0G^0 has constant one by (7) and has the Haagerup property by Step 2. The permanence result [6 Proposition 6.1.5 and Example 6.1.6 pp. 90–91] then gives the Haagerup property for GG.

Step 4: removal of the countability assumption. Let GG be any locally compact group with ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = 1 such that G/G0G/G^0 is amenable. Fix a compact subset QQ of GG and ε>0\varepsilon> 0. The subgroup generated by Q∪Q−1Q \cup Q^{-1} and a compact symmetric identity neighbourhood is a compactly generated open subgroup HH containing QQ. The group HH is σ\sigma-compact. Since it is open and closed, it contains G0G^0 and H0=G0H^0 = G^0. Therefore H/H0H/H^0 is an open, hence closed, subgroup of the amenable locally compact group G/G0G/G^0. It is amenable by [2 Corollary G.3.4 p. 431].

By Kakutani–Kodaira [23 Theorem 8.7 p. 71], choose a compact normal subgroup KK of HH such that L≔H/KL \coloneqq H/K is second countable. Let q ⁣:H→Lq \colon H \to L be the quotient map. The connected group q(H0)q(H^0) is contained in L0L^0. Thus qq induces the continuous surjective homomorphism

H/H0→L/L0,xH0↦q(x)L0.H/H^0 \to L/L^0,\qquad xH^0 \mapsto q(x)L^0.

This homomorphism is open, since the quotient maps H→H/H0H \to H/H^0, qq and L→L/L0L \to L/L^0 are open. Consequently, L/L0L/L^0 is a Hausdorff quotient of the amenable group H/H0H/H^0 and is amenable by [2 Proposition G.2.2(i) p. 425]. By (7), we have ΛWA(L)=ΛWA(H)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(L) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(H) = 1. Step 3 gives φ∈P1(L)∩C0(L)\varphi\in P_1(L) \cap C_0(L) with ∣φ−1∣<ε|\varphi- 1| < \varepsilon on q(Q)q(Q). Its pullback belongs to P1(H)∩C0(H)P_1(H) \cap C_0(H), since qq is proper. Extend this function by zero outside the open subgroup HH. The resulting function belongs to P1(G)∩C0(G)P_1(G) \cap C_0(G) and is within ε\varepsilon of one on QQ. Varying QQ and ε\varepsilon gives the required net.

Step 5: the converse. Suppose that the group G/G0G/G^0 is amenable and that GG has the Haagerup property. Restriction of the positive definite approximants to the closed subgroup G0G^0 shows that G0G^0 has the Haagerup property. Step 2 gives ΛWA(G0)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G^0) = 1, and (2.7) gives ΛWA(G)=1\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = 1. Finally, an almost connected group has compact component quotient, which is amenable by [2 Example G.1.5 p. 423]. This proves all assertions.

Quotients and lattices

We first treat arbitrary quotients in the connected case. Centrality will then give equality, including when weak amenability fails.

Corollary 7.1 Let GG be a connected locally compact group and let NN be a closed normal subgroup of GG. Then ΛWA(G/N)≤ΛWA(G)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/N) \le\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G).

Proof: Suppose first that GG is a Lie group and that ΛWA(G)<∞\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) < \infty. Let n\mathfrak{n} be the Lie algebra of NN and let ϕ:g→g/n\phi:\mathfrak{g} \to\mathfrak{g}/\mathfrak{n} be the quotient map. By [4 Chapter I, Section 6.2, Corollary 2 to Proposition 2 p. 53], the radical of g/n\mathfrak{g}/\mathfrak{n} is ϕ(r)\phi(\mathfrak{r}). Moreover, s∩n\mathfrak{s} \cap\mathfrak{n} is an ideal of s\mathfrak{s}, hence is the sum of the si\mathfrak{s}_i for ii in some set JJ, by [4 Chapter I, Section 6.2, Corollary 1 to Proposition 2 p. 53]. Consequently, ϕ(s)\phi(\mathfrak{s}) is semisimple, with simple ideals isomorphic to the si\mathfrak{s}_i for i∉Ji \notin J. Its intersection with ϕ(r)\phi(\mathfrak{r}) is a solvable ideal of ϕ(s)\phi(\mathfrak{s}), hence is zero. Since ϕ(r)+ϕ(s)=g/n\phi(\mathfrak{r}) + \phi(\mathfrak{s}) = \mathfrak{g}/\mathfrak{n}, this makes ϕ(s)\phi(\mathfrak{s}) a Levi subalgebra. For i∉Ji \notin J, the isomorphism from si\mathfrak{s}_i onto ϕ(si)\phi(\mathfrak{s}_i) preserves compact type and real rank, and

[ϕ(si),ϕ(r)]=ϕ([si,r]).[\phi(\mathfrak{s}_i),\phi(\mathfrak{r})] = \phi([\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]).

Thus the commutation conditions pass to the quotient. Theorem 1 gives

ΛWA(G/N)=∏i∉JΛWA(Si)≤∏iΛWA(Si)=(1.2)ΛWA(G).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/N) = \prod_{i\notin J}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i) \le\prod_i\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(S_i) \overset{(1.2)}{=} \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G).

Here the constants of the simple analytic subgroups depend only on their Lie algebras, by [33 Theorem 1.1 p. 102]. If ΛWA(G)=∞\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G) = \infty, the assertion is immediate.

For a connected locally compact group GG, choose a compact normal subgroup KK such that G/KG/K is a connected Lie group, by Gleason–Yamabe Theorem [8 Theorem 2.E.14 p. 46]. The subgroup NKNK is normal and is closed by [3 Chapter III, Section 4.1, Corollary 1 to Proposition 1 p. 251], since NN is closed and KK is compact. Its image NK/NNK/N in G/NG/N is the compact image of KK. Transitivity of quotients [3 Chapter III, Section 2.7, Corollary to Proposition 22 p. 235] identifies

(G/N)/(NK/N)≃G/NK≃(G/K)/(NK/K).(G/N)/(NK/N) \simeq G/NK \simeq(G/K)/(NK/K).

In particular, G/NKG/NK is a quotient of the connected Lie group G/KG/K. Hence

ΛWA(G/N)=(2.4)ΛWA(G/NK)≤ΛWA(G/K)=(2.4)ΛWA(G).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/N) \overset{(2.4)}{=} \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/NK) \le\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/K) \overset{(2.4)}{=} \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G).

This proves the assertion.

Lemma 7.2 Let GG be a connected locally compact group and ZZ be a closed central subgroup. Then

ΛWA(G/Z)=ΛWA(G).(15)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G). \tag*{(15)}

Proof: Corollary 7.1 gives one inequality. Suppose first that GG is a Lie group and ΛWA(G/Z)<∞\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z) < \infty. Let z\mathfrak{z} be the Lie algebra of ZZ. It is a central ideal contained in r\mathfrak{r}, so the simple Levi ideals of g/z\mathfrak{g}/\mathfrak{z} are isomorphic to the si\mathfrak{s}_i. By Theorem 1 applied to G/ZG/Z, every non-compact si\mathfrak{s}_i has real rank one and [si,r]⊂z[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}] \subset\mathfrak{z}. Since si=[si,si]\mathfrak{s}_i = [\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{s}_i], the Jacobi identity and centrality give

[si,r]=[[si,si],r]⊂[si,[si,r]]⊂[si,z]={0}.[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}] = [[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{s}_i],\mathfrak{r}] \subset[\mathfrak{s}_i,[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{r}]] \subset[\mathfrak{s}_i,\mathfrak{z}] = \{0\}.

Thus GG satisfies the same weak amenability criterion as G/ZG/Z, with the same simple factors. The product formula proves equality. If ΛWA(G/Z)=∞\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z)=\infty, Corollary 7.1 already gives equality. For general connected GG, choose a compact normal subgroup KK with G/KG/K a Lie group. The subgroup ZK/KZK/K is closed and central in G/KG/K, while ZK/ZZK/Z is compact. The Lie case gives

ΛWA(G/Z)=(2.4)ΛWA(G/ZK)=ΛWA(G/K)=(2.4)ΛWA(G).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z) \mathrel{\overset{(2.4)}{=}} \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/ZK)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/K) \mathrel{\overset{(2.4)}{=}} \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G).

Lemma 7.3 Let GG be a locally compact group and ZZ be a closed central subgroup. Let q:G→Q=defG/Zq:G\to Q\mathrel{\overset{\mathrm{def}}{=}}G/Z and p:G→G/G0p:G\to G/G^0 be the quotient maps and put A=defp(Z)A\mathrel{\overset{\mathrm{def}}{=}}p(Z). Then Q/Q0Q/Q^0 and (G/G0)/A(G/G^0)/A are isomorphic topological groups. In particular, G/G0G/G^0 is amenable if and only if Q/Q0Q/Q^0 is amenable.

Proof: By [23 Theorem 7.12 p. 63], we have Q0=q(G0)Q^0=q(G^0). The subgroup AA is closed and central in G/G0G/G^0. In particular, AA is abelian, hence amenable by [2 Theorem G.2.1 p. 424]. The subsets G0Z=q−1(q(G0))=p−1(p(Z))G^0Z=q^{-1}(q(G^0))=p^{-1}(p(Z)) are saturated for both quotient maps. By [3 Chapter I, Section 5.3, Propositions 6 and 7 pp. 54–55], closure commutes with passing to these open quotients. Therefore,

q−1(Q0)=G0Z‾=p−1(A).q^{-1}(Q^0)=\overline{G^0Z}=p^{-1}(A).

The continuous open surjection G→Q/Q0G\to Q/Q^0 consequently has kernel p−1(A)p^{-1}(A). Factoring first through G/G0G/G^0 gives the topological isomorphism

Q/Q0≅(G/G0)/A.(16)Q/Q^0 \cong(G/G^0)/A. \tag*{(16)}

If G/G0G/G^0 is amenable, then its quotient Q/Q0Q/Q^0 is amenable by [2 Proposition G.2.2(i) p. 425]. Conversely, if Q/Q0Q/Q^0 is amenable, then G/G0G/G^0 is an extension of that group by the closed amenable normal subgroup AA, and is amenable by [2 Proposition G.2.2(ii) p. 425]. Thus G/G0G/G^0 is amenable if and only if Q/Q0Q/Q^0 is amenable.

Notice that q(G0)q(G^0) need not be closed. Now, we prove Theorem 3.

Theorem 3 Let GG be a locally compact group such that the group G/G0G/G^0 is amenable, and let ZZ be a closed central subgroup of GG. Then

ΛWA(G/Z)=ΛWA(G).(17)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G). \tag*{(17)}

The conclusion also holds if the group (G/Z)/(G/Z)0(G/Z)/(G/Z)^0 is amenable. In particular, it holds if either GG or G/ZG/Z is almost connected.

Proof: We first suppose that the group GG is almost connected. Choose a compact normal subgroup KK such that L=G/KL=G/K is a Lie group with finitely many components [8 Theorem 2.E.14 p. 46]. Put B=defZK/KB\mathrel{\overset{\mathrm{def}}{=}}ZK/K, a closed central subgroup of LL. By (7), ΛWA(G)=ΛWA(L)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(L) and ΛWA(G/Z)=ΛWA(L/B)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(L/B). The image of the open connected subgroup L0L^0 in L/BL/B is open and connected, hence is (L/B)0(L/B)^0. Thus

(L/B)0≅L0/(L0∩B).(L/B)^0 \cong L^0/(L^0\cap B).

Both LL and L/BL/B have finitely many components. Lemma 7.2 therefore yields

ΛWA(L)=(2.7)ΛWA(L0)=ΛWA(L0/(L0∩B))=ΛWA((L/B)0)=(2.7)ΛWA(L/B).(18)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(L) \overset{(2.7)}{=} \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(L^{0}) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}\left(L^{0}/(L^{0}\cap B)\right) = \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}\left((L/B)^{0}\right) \overset{(2.7)}{=} \Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(L/B). \tag*{(18)}

This proves the almost connected case.

Now, suppose that the group G/G0G/G^{0} is amenable, with no countability assumption. Choose an open almost connected subgroup HH of GG containing G0G^{0} [8 Corollary 2.E.7 p. 44]. Then H0=G0H^{0}=G^{0}. The subgroup q(H)q(H) is open and almost connected in Q=G/ZQ=G/Z, and q(H)0=Q0q(H)^{0}=Q^{0}, since an open subgroup has the same identity component as its ambient group. By (16), Q/Q0Q/Q^{0} is amenable. Applying (2.7) to G,H,QG,H,Q and q(H)q(H), and the almost connected case to (H,H∩Z)(H,H\cap Z), gives

ΛWA(G)=ΛWA(H)=ΛWA(H/(H∩Z))=ΛWA(q(H))=ΛWA(Q).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(H)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}\left(H/(H\cap Z)\right)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(q(H))=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(Q).

Here H/(H∩Z)→q(H)H/(H\cap Z)\to q(H) is a topological isomorphism because HH is open and qq is an open quotient map. This proves (3). The alternative assumption on Q/Q0Q/Q^{0} is equivalent to that on G/G0G/G^{0}, by (16). The last assertion follows.

A lattice in a locally compact group is a discrete subgroup whose homogeneous space admits an invariant probability measure. For a lattice Γ\Gamma in GG, we use the equality [12 Proposition 6.2 and the following observation, p. 546]

ΛWA(Γ)=ΛWA(G).(19)\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\Gamma)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G). \tag*{(19)}

The observation following that proposition removes the second countability assumption.

Corollary 7.5 Let GG be a connected locally compact group, let Γ\Gamma be a lattice of GG, and let ZZ be a subgroup of Γ\Gamma contained in the centre of GG. Then

ΛWA(Γ/Z)=ΛWA(Γ).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\Gamma/Z)=\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\Gamma).

If this constant is one, then the groups Γ\Gamma and Γ/Z\Gamma/Z have the Haagerup property.

Proof: The subgroup ZZ is closed and discrete in GG. Let q:G→G/Zq:G\to G/Z be the quotient map. Choose an open identity neighbourhood UU in GG with U∩Γ={e}U\cap\Gamma=\{e\}. Since Z⊂ΓZ\subset\Gamma, we have UZ∩Γ=ZUZ\cap\Gamma=Z, so q(U)∩q(Γ)={e}q(U)\cap q(\Gamma)=\{e\}. Thus q(Γ)q(\Gamma) is discrete and is isomorphic to Γ/Z\Gamma/Z. The natural map G/Γ→(G/Z)/q(Γ)G/\Gamma\to(G/Z)/q(\Gamma) is an equivariant homeomorphism by transitivity of quotient spaces [3 Chapter I, Section 3.4, Proposition 7 p. 40], applied to the coset relations defined by Z⊂ΓZ\subset\Gamma. The invariant probability measure on the first space gives one on the second. Hence q(Γ)q(\Gamma) is a lattice of the group G/ZG/Z. The lattice equality and Lemma 7.2 give

ΛWA(Γ)=(7.4)ΛWA(G)=(7.1)ΛWA(G/Z)=(7.4)ΛWA(Γ/Z).\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\Gamma)\overset{(7.4)}{=}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G)\overset{(7.1)}{=}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(G/Z)\overset{(7.4)}{=}\Lambda_{\mathrm{WA}}(\Gamma/Z).

If the common value is one, the connected groups GG and G/ZG/Z have the Haagerup property by Theorem 2. Restriction to their closed subgroups Γ\Gamma and q(Γ)q(\Gamma) proves the last assertion.

AI statement. The author acknowledges the use of AI tools for language polishing, exploratory mathematical discussions and feedback during the development and preparation of this manuscript.

Competing interests The author declares that he has no competing interests.

Data availability No data sets were generated during this study.

Bibliography

Cédric Arhancet 6 rue Didier Daurat, 81000 Albi, France URL: https://sites.google.com/site/cedricarhancet [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0002-5179-6972

References

  1. [1]D. Allcock. Reflection groups on the octave hyperbolic plane. J. Algebra 213 (1999), no. 2, 467–498. Author’s version, 4 August 1997, available at https://web.ma.utexas.edu/users/allcock/research/oh2.pdf.DOI
  2. [2]B. Bekka, P. de la Harpe and A. Valette. Kazhdan’s property (T). New Mathematical Monographs, 11. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008. 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22
  3. [3]N. Bourbaki. General topology. Part 1. Elements of Mathematics. Hermann, Paris; Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1966. 5, 10, 17, 21, 22, 23
  4. [4]N. Bourbaki. Lie groups and Lie algebras. Chapters 1–3. Elements of Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989. 3, 7, 8, 10, 17, 21
  5. [5]N. Bourbaki. Lie groups and Lie algebras. Chapters 7–9. Elements of Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2005. 8, 12, 17
  6. [6]P.-A. Cherix, M. Cowling, P. Jolissaint, P. Julg and A. Valette. Groups with the Haagerup property. Gromov’s a-T-menability. Progress in Mathematics, 197. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2001. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20
  7. [7]Y. de Cornulier. Relative Kazhdan property. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 39 (2006), no. 2, 301–333. 12
  8. [8]Y. Cornulier and P. de la Harpe. Metric geometry of locally compact groups. EMS Tracts in Mathematics, 25. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2016. 7, 10, 20, 21, 22, 23DOI
  9. [9]Y. Cornulier and A. Valette. On equivariant embeddings of generalized Baumslag–Solitar groups. Geom. Dedicata 175 (2015), 385–401. Preprint version, 16 September 2013: https://www.normalesup.org/~cornulier/covagbs.pdf. 4, 5, 11DOI
  10. [10]M. Cowling. Harmonic analysis on some nilpotent groups (with applications to the representation theory of some semisimple Lie groups). In: Topics in modern harmonic analysis, Vol. I, 81–123. Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica, Roma, 1983. 2
  11. [11]M. Cowling, B. Dorofaeff, A. Seeger and J. Wright. A family of singular oscillatory integral operators and failure of weak amenability. Duke Math. J. 127 (2005), no. 3, 429–486. 3, 19arxiv.org/abs/math/0210136
  12. [12]M. Cowling and U. Haagerup. Completely bounded multipliers of the Fourier algebra of a simple Lie group of real rank one. Invent. Math. 96 (1989), no. 3, 507–549. 2, 7, 12, 18, 23
  13. [13]J. de Canniére and U. Haagerup. Multipliers of the Fourier algebras of some simple Lie groups and their discrete subgroups. Amer. J. Math. 107 (1985), no. 2, 455–500. 2
  14. [14]G. van Dijk. Introduction to harmonic analysis and generalized Gelfand pairs. De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics, 36. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 2009. 5
  15. [15]B. Dorofaeff. Weak amenability and semidirect products in simple Lie groups. Math. Ann. 306 (1996), no. 3, 737–742. 2
  16. [16]R. Engelking. General topology. Revised and completed edition. Sigma Series in Pure Mathematics, 6. Heldermann Verlag, Berlin, 1989. 14
  17. [17]M. Flensted-Jensen. Spherical functions on a simply connected semisimple Lie group. II. The Paley–Wiener theorem for the rank one case. Math. Ann. 228 (1977), 65–92. 4, 13
  18. [18]U. Haagerup. Group C*-algebras without the completely bounded approximation property. J. Lie Theory 26 (2016), no. 3, 861–887. 2arxiv.org/abs/1603.00209
  19. [19]U. Haagerup and S. Knudby. The weak Haagerup property II: examples. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2015, no. 16, 6941–6967. 12, 17, 18, 20DOI
  20. [20]U. Haagerup, S. Knudby and T. de Laat. A complete characterization of connected Lie groups with the approximation property. Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér. (4) 49 (2016), no. 4, 927–946. 8, 11, 12
  21. [21]M. L. Hansen. Weak amenability of the universal covering group of SU(1, n). Math. Ann. 288 (1990), no. 3, 445–472. 2, 13, 14, 16
  22. [22]S. Helgason. Differential Geometry, Lie Groups, and Symmetric Spaces. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 34. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001. 7
  23. [23]E. Hewitt and K. A. Ross. Abstract harmonic analysis. Vol. I. Structure of topological groups, integration theory, group representations. Second edition. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 115. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979. 7, 13, 14, 20, 22
  24. [25]K. H. Hofmann and S. A. Morris. The Lie theory of connected pro-Lie groups. A structure theory for pro-Lie algebras, pro-Lie groups, and connected locally compact groups. EMS Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 2. European Mathematical Society, Zürich, 2007. 18
  25. [26]P. Jolissaint, A characterization of completely bounded multipliers of Fourier algebras. Colloq. Math. 63 (1992), no. 2, 311–313. 6DOI
  26. [28]E. Kaniuth and A. T.-M. Lau. Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras on locally compact groups. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 231. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2018. 6, 7DOI
  27. [29]E. Kaniuth and K. F. Taylor. Induced representations of locally compact groups. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 197, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. 9DOI
  28. [30]A. W. Knapp. Lie groups beyond an introduction. Second edition, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 140, Birkhäuser, Boston, 2002. 2, 3, 8, 17
  29. [31]S. Knudby. The weak Haagerup property. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 368 (2016), no. 5, 3469–3508. 6DOI
  30. [32]S. Knudby. Weak amenability and simply connected Lie groups. Kyoto J. Math. 56 (2016), no. 3, 689–700. 3, 7, 12, 19DOI
  31. [33]S. Knudby. Weak amenability of Lie groups made discrete. Pacific J. Math. 297 (2018), no. 1, 101–116. 2, 3, 6, 7, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21DOI
  32. [36]N. Ozawa. Examples of groups which are not weakly amenable. Kyoto J. Math. 52 (2012), no. 2, 333–344. 4, 9DOI
  33. [37]T. W. Palmer. Banach algebras and the general theory of *-algebras. Vol. 2. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 79. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001. 3
  34. [38]N. Spronk, Measurable Schur multipliers and completely bounded multipliers of the Fourier algebras. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 89 (2004), no. 1, 161–192. 6DOI
  35. [39]A. Valette. The exceptional simple Lie group F₄(−20), after J. Tits. Innov. Incidence Geom. 20 (2023), no. 2–3, 599–610. Preprint version: arXiv:2211.13480v1, 2022. 2DOI
  36. [40]V. S. Varadarajan. Lie groups, Lie algebras, and their representations. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 102, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1984. 2, 7DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_bvw4paqk

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 2

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY-SA 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents