Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:02:51.447Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AUTOMORPHISMS AND OPPOSITION IN TWIN BUILDINGS

Part of: Finite geometry and special incidence structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2013

ALICE DEVILLERS ,
JAMES PARKINSON  and
HENDRIK VAN MALDEGHEM
ALICE DEVILLERS
Affiliation:
Centre for the Mathematics of Symmetry and Computation, School of Mathematics & Statistics, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia email alice.devillers@uwa.edu.au
JAMES PARKINSON*
Affiliation:
School of Mathematics & Statistics, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
HENDRIK VAN MALDEGHEM
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Ghent University, Krijgslaan 281, S22, 9000 Gent, Belgium email hvm@cage.UGent.be
*
✉jamesp@maths.usyd.edu.au
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We show that every automorphism of a thick twin building interchanging the halves of the building maps some residue to an opposite one. Furthermore, we show that no automorphism of a locally finite 2-spherical twin building of rank at least 3 maps every residue of one fixed type to an opposite (a key step in the proof is showing that every duality of a thick finite projective plane admits an absolute point). Our results also hold for all finite irreducible spherical buildings of rank at least 3, and imply that every involution of a thick irreducible finite spherical building of rank at least 3 has a fixed residue.

Keywords

twin buildingsprojective planesspherical buildings

MSC classification

Secondary: 51E24: Buildings and the geometry of diagrams
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society , Volume 94 , Issue 2 , April 2013 , pp. 189 - 201
Copyright
Copyright ©2013 Australian Mathematical Publishing Association Inc. 

References

Abramenko, P. and Brown, K., Buildings: Theory and Applications, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 248 (Springer, Charlottesville, VA, 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramenko, P. and Brown, K., ‘Automorphisms of non-spherical buildings have unbounded displacement’, Innov. Incidence Geom. 10 (2009), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baer, R., ‘Polarities in finite projective planes’, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 52 (1946), 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Medts, T., Gramlich, R. and Horn, M., ‘Iwasawa decompositions of split Kac–Moody groups’, J. Lie Theory 19 (2) (2009), 311–337.Google Scholar
Feit, W. and Higman, G., ‘The nonexistence of certain generalized polygons’, J. Algebra 1 (1964), 114–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fong, P. and Seitz, G., ‘Groups with a BN-pair of rank 2, I’, Invent. Math. 21 (1973), 1–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fong, P. and Seiz, G., ‘Groups with a BN-pair of rank 2, II’, Invent. Math. 24 (1974), 191–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gramlich, R., Horn, M. and Mühlherr, B., ‘Abstract involutions of algebraic groups and of Kac–Moody groups’, J. Group Theory 14 (2) (2011), 213–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, M., ‘Involutions of Kac–Moody groups’, PhD Thesis, TU Darmstadt, 2009.Google Scholar
Hughes, D. R. and Piper, F. C., Projective Planes (Springer, New York, 1973).Google Scholar
Ronan, M. and Tits, J., ‘Twin trees I’, Invent. Math. 116 (1994), 463–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temmermans, B., ‘Dualities and collineations of projective and polar spaces and of related geometries’, PhD Thesis, Ghent University, 2010.Google Scholar
Temmermans, B., Thas, J. A. and Van Maldeghem, H., ‘Collineations and dualities of finite generalized polygons’, Combinatorica 29 (2009), 569–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temmermans, B., Thas, J. A. and Van Maldeghem, H., ‘Collineations and dualities of partial geometries’, Discrete Math. 310 (2010), 3251–3258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temmermans, B., Thas, J. A. and Van Maldeghem, H., ‘Domesticity in projective spaces’, Innov. Incidence Geom. 12 (2011), 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temmermans, B., Thas, J. A. and Van Maldeghem, H., ‘Collineations of polar spaces with restricted displacements’, Des. Codes Cryptogr. 64 (2012), 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temmermans, B., Thas, J. A. and Van Maldeghem, H., ‘Domesticity in generalized quadrangles’, Ann. Comb. 16 (4) (2012), 905–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tits, J., Buildings of Spherical Type and Finite BN-Pairs, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 386 (Springer, Berlin, 1974).Google Scholar
Tits, J., ‘Classification of buildings of spherical type and Moufang polygons: a survey’, Coll. Intern. Teorie Combin. Acc. Naz. Lincei, Proceedings Roma 1976, Atti dei convegni Lincei 17 (1976), 229–246.Google Scholar
Tits, J., ‘Uniqueness and presentation of Kac–Moody groups over fields’, J. Algebra 105 (1987), 542–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tits, J., ‘Twin buildings and groups of Kac–Moody type’, in: Groups, Combinatorics and Geometry, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, 165 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).Google Scholar
Van Maldeghem, H., ‘Symplectic polarities of buildings of type ${ \mathsf{E} }_{6} $’, Des. Codes Cryptogr. 65 (2012), 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar