1. Introduction
In the classification of the simple finite-dimensional Lie algebras over fields of prime characteristic, irreducible transitive finite dimensional graded Lie algebras play a fundamental role [1] . The simple finite dimensional Lie algebras over algebraically closed fields of characteristic greater than three have been classified [2] . Work is being done in characteristic three [3] - [7] . It is well known that in Lie algebras of Cartan type, there is a (not necessarily proper) subalgebra, the “initial piece,” which contains the sum of the negative gradations spaces of the Lie algebra, and in which the
power of the adjoint representation associated with any element of the lowest gradation space is zero. In this paper, we prove that any irreducible, transitive finite-dimensional graded Lie algebra contains such an initial subalgebra. Indeed, we prove the following theorem.
2. Main Theorem
Let

be an irreducible, transitive, finite-dimensional graded Lie algebra over a field of characteristic
such that M(G) = 0 [8] . Then
contains an irreducible, transitive depth-
graded subalgebra

where
, and where I is a non-negative whole number. We have
,
, and
for all
.
If
, then the conclusion of the theorem obviously holds. In what follows, therefore, we will assume that
.
2. Intermediate Results
To prove the Main Theorem, we will make use of the following series of lemmas, in which we assume the hypotheses and notation of the Main Theorem. We note that by, for example, [9] (Lemma 6),
is transitive in its negative part. (Note that the lemmas we quote from [9] are valid for all prime characteristics.) As usual, we assume throughout that M(G) = 0 [8] .
Lemma 1. If M is an abelian
-submodule of G, then for any
,
is a
-endomorphism of G for all
.
Proof. For any
,
, and
, we have
![]()
so that modulo ![]()
![]()
Lemma 2. If
is such that
for some
, then
is a
-endomorphism of G.
Proof. As in the proof of Lemma 1 above, we have, for any
and any
, that modulo
,
![]()
Lemma 3. If
, and
is maximal such that
, then
is a Lie subalgebra.
Proof. Let
and
be any elements of
, Then for any
,
![]()
since, as we have seen in the proofs of the previous lemmas,
is a derivation, and
. In addition, since
we have
. Hence,
, which, as it is obviously closed under addition, is seen to be a Lie
subalgebra, as required. ![]()
Lemma 4. Let I be the minimal (graded) ideal of G [8] . If
is such that
for some
integers j and k, with
and
, then
for all m,
, i.e.,
.
Proof. Suppose
. Then for all m,
, we have (since for all
,
, we have
)
![]()
so
by transitivity. If
, then
![]()
Lemma 5. If
for some k such that
and for some
, then
.
Proof. We will show that
for all
,
. (If
, then
.) First of all, suppose that
. Then, since
, we have, by Lemma 4 that
. Consequently, we have
![]()
so
by the transitivity of
, if
, or [9] (Lemma 6) otherwise. Finally, if ![]()
and
, then by Lemma 1 (or Lemma 2),
is a non-zero
-submodule of
. But
by, for example, [9] (Lemma 9),
is irreducible as a
module; therefore,
, and we have
![]()
(by Lemma 4, as we noted earlier in the proof). But then, since
, we would have
![]()
so
by, for example, [9] (Lemma 6), to contradict, for example, [9] (Lemma 8). Thus, we must
have
in this case, also, so
as required. ![]()
Lemma 6. If
for some
and
, then both
and
are non-
zero, and
.
Proof. If
, then
, since otherwise we would have
, con-
trary to hypothesis. By Lemma 5,
is not zero, and by Lemma 1 (or Lemma 2), ![]()
is a
-submodule of
; hence, by, for example, [9] (Lemma 9),
![]()
Since
is a derivation of
which annihilates
, we have, by, for example, [9] (Lemma 8) that
![]()
Thus, both
and
are non-zero, and Lemma 6 is proved. ![]()
Lemma 7. Let
be a non-zero element of
. If
is maximal such that
, then
.
Proof. Suppose
. Then for any
, which is non-zero by Lemma 6, we have that
![]()
Thus
, so
is a nil set of endomorphisms of
. By Lemma 3, this nil set of endomorphisms is weakly closed, so by Jacobson’s theorem on nil weakly closed sets [10] ,
acts nilpotently on
and therefore annihilates some non-zero element of
By Lemma 1 (or Lemma 2),
is a
-submodule of
(i.e., an ideal of
). Hence, the annihi-
lator of
in
must be a
-submodule of
. By the assumed irreducibility of
, ![]()
is irreducible as a
-module. Consequently,
![]()
i.e.,
, But then, we have by transitivity that
, so that, by Lemma 6
again
contrary to the choice of
. Thus,
must be non-zero, as asserted. ![]()
Lemma 8. Let
be a non-zero element of
, and let
be maximal such that
. Then
is a Lie algebra, and we have that both
and
. Con- sequently,
is an irreducible, transitive, depth-
graded Lie algebra which is annihilated by
.
Proof. For
(since
, by the definition of
), we have
![]()
so
; i.e.
is a Lie algebra whenever
, its
closure under addition being obvious. Note that we must have
, since otherwise we would
have
, to contradict Lemma 7.
By Lemma 6,
. By Lemma 1 (or Lemma 2),
is a non-zero ideal of
.
Thus, by transitivity and irreducibility,
. Thus, we have
![]()
Consequently, we conclude that
, so
. By Lemma 6,
,
also. Thus,
is an irreducible, transitive depth-q graded Lie algebra. Since by Lemma 7,
, it follows that
, so we may repeat the argument just made to con-
clude that
is an irreducible, transitive depth-q graded Lie algebra. Repeating the argument ![]()
more times, we conclude the proof of Lemma 8. ![]()
3. Proof of Main Theorem
Let
be the maximum whole number such that
for some
. Such a maximal
must exist, since the height
of the finite-dimensional graded Lie algebra
is finite. If
, then we are done. Suppose then that
. Let
be an element of
such that
. Then by Lemma 8,
![]()
is an irreducible, transitive, finite-dimensional depth-
graded Lie algebra to which we may apply Lemma 8 to obtain a
and
such that
![]()
is an irreducible, transitive, finite-dimensional depth-q graded Lie algebra to which we may apply Lemma 8 again. Since
is abelian, it follows that
![]()
Consequently, if
, then
, so
is linearly independent of
. Since
, like
is finite-dimensional, we can, by repeating this process, arrive at an integer
such that
, but
for any
for which
is ultimately defined through the repetitive process we just described. Then
![]()
Since the sequence
is non-increasing, the aforementioned commutativity of
entails that
.
If, in the above argument, we replace
and
with
and
, we eventually, by the finite dimensionality of
, obtain a
such that
, but
. Continuing in this way, using
and
, in the above argument, we see that the series
must eventually decrease to zero; i.e., we obtain a Lie algebra
such that
for all
, as required. ![]()
Remark. Note that if we define
, and
for
, and
, then we get, for depth
, something analogous to a flag in the sense of [1] .