Search

The conjugacy of split Cartan subalgebras in the finite dimensional simple case (Chevalley) and in the symmetrizable Kac-Moody case (Peterson-Kac) are fundamental results of the theory of Lie algebras. Among the Kac-Moody Lie algebras the affine algebras stand out. This paper deals with the problem of conjugacy for a class of algebras --extended affine Lie algebras-- that are in a precise sense higher nullity analogues of the affine algebras. Unlike the methods used by Peterson-Kac, our approach is entirely cohomological and geometric. It is deeply rooted on the theory of reductive group schemes developed by Demazure and Grothendieck, and on the work of J. Tits on buildings, Publi\'e dans Bulletin of Mathematical Sciences 4 (2014), 281-324

International audience; We define and study the Whitehead group of isotropic (almost) simple simply connected group schemes over Laurent polynomial rings. Our motivation for doing this comes from infinite dimensional Lie theory.

Let G be a linear algebraic group defined over a field k. We prove that, under mild assumptions on k and G, there exists a finite k-subgroup S of G such that the natural map H^1(K, S) -> H^1(K, G) is surjective for every field extension K/k. We give several applications of this result in the case where k an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero and K/k is finitely generated. In particular, we prove that for every z in H^1(K, G) there exists an abelian field extension L/K such that z_L \in H^1(L, G) is represented by a G-torsor over a projective variety. From this we deduce that z_L has trivial point obstruction. We also show that a (strong) variant of the algebraic form of Hilbert's 13th problem implies that the maximal abelian extension of K has cohomological dimension =< 1. The last assertion, if true, would prove conjectures of Bogomolov and Koenigsmann, answer a question of Tits and establish an important case of Serre's Conjecture II for the group E_8., New material added on the no-name lemma in Section 4 and on Hilbert's 13th problem in Section 9. A mistake in the proof of Proposition 2.3 is corrected