1 3

Geometriae Dedicata

ISSN 0046-5755

Geom Dedicata
DOI 10.1007/s10711-014-9980-4
Lorentz geometry of 4-dimensional
nilpotent Lie groups
N.Bokan, T.ukilovi & S.Vukmirovi
1 3
Your article is protected by copyright and all
rights are held exclusively by Springer Science
+Business Media Dordrecht. This e-offprint
is for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com.
Geom Dedicata
DOI 10.1007/s10711-014-9980-4
ORIGINAL PAPER
Lorentz geometry of 4-dimensional nilpotent Lie groups
N. Bokan T. ukilovi c S. Vukmirovi c
Received: 14 November 2013 / Accepted: 2 April 2014
Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
Abstract In the present work we classify, up to automorphism, left invariant Lorentz met-
rics on 4-dimensional nilpotent Lie groups H
3
R and G
4
. We investigate their geometry,
especially holonomy groups and decomposability of these metrics. Finally, we nd projective
classes of the metrics and prove all of these metrics are also left invariant.
Keywords Nilpotent group Holonomy group Geodesically equivalent metrics
Mathematical Subject Classication (2010) 53B10 53B30 53C22 22E25
1 Introduction
While the geometric properties of Lie groups with left invariant positive denite metric have
been studied extensively, it is not the case for pseudo-Riemannian metrics. For example,
the Milnors classication of 3-dimensional Lie groups with left invariant positive denite
metric [23] has become a classic reference, while the corresponding Lorentz classication
[4] followed twenty years later. The case of nilpotent Lie group N is particularly simple and
interesting, but many questions are still open even in low dimensions. We refer to [13, 15]
and references therein for some classication type results for small dimensions in positive
denite setting.
One of the striking differences between positive denite and pseudo-Riemannian setting
is the result of Rahmani [24], where it is shown that on 3-dimensional Heisenberg group
H
3
, there are three non-equivalent Lorentz left invariant metrics, one of which is at. In the
positive denite case there is only one such metric and it is not at.
The structure of isometry group of nilpotent group with left invariant metric is also much
more complex in pseudo-Riemannian setting (see [5]).
N. Bokan
Department of Mathematics, State University of Novi Pazar, Novi Pazar, Serbia
T. ukilovi c S. Vukmirovi c (B)
Faculty of Mathematics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
e-mail: vsrdjan@matf.bg.ac.rs
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Since exponential map on any nilpotent Lie group N is diffeomorphism, by Hopf-Rinow
theorem any positive denite metric on N is geodesically complete. However, Guediri [7]
has found a left invariant metric on 4-dimensional nilpotent Lie group that is not complete.
In fact, it is one of metrics that we have found in the classication that is subject of this paper.
Additional open and not well understood question in geometry of Lie groups, in general, is
projective equivalence of their left invariant metrics. Let (M
n
, g) be a connected Riemannian
or pseudo-Riemannian manifold of dimension n 2. We say that a metric g on M
n
is
geodesically equivalent to g, if every geodesic of g is a (reparameterized) geodesic of g. We
say that they are afnely equivalent, if their Levi-Civita connections coincide. We call a metric
g geodesically rigid, if every metric g, geodesically equivalent to g, is proportional to g. Weyl
[29] proved that two conformally and geodesically equivalent metrics are proportional with
a constant coefcient of the proportionality. Note that projectively equivalent metrics may
have different signatures.
The rst examples of geodesically equivalent metrics are due to Lagrange [16]. Later,
Beltrami [1, 2] generalized this example for the metrics of constant negative curvature, and
for the pseudo-Riemannian metrics of constant curvature. Though the examples of Lagrange
and Beltrami are two-dimensional, one can easily generalize them for every dimension (for
positive denite metrics, it has been already done [1]) and for every signature.
Since the time of Herman Weyl, geodesically equivalent metrics were actively discussed
in the realm of general relativity. The context of general relativity poses the following
restrictions: the dimension is 4, the metrics are pseudo-Riemannian of Lorentz signature
(, +, +, +). Sometimes the metrics satisfy additional assumptions such that one or both
metrics are Ricci-at (the vacuum R
i j
= 0), or Einstein (R
i j
=
R
4
g
i j
), or, more generally,
satisfy the Einstein equation R
i j

R
2
g
i j
= T
i j
with physically interesting stress-energy
tensor T
i j
. We refer to [6, 9, 21] for more details. We also point out that geodesic equivalence
of metrics is closely related to theory of integrable Hamiltonian systems (see for example
[19, 20]). For more historical details one can refer to [22] and references therein.
Although, in general, for geodesically equivalent metrics g and g, their corresponding
Levi-Civita connections and

may still be expected to differ, as it turns out in many
interesting situations they are necessarily equal. Sinjukov [26] proved that all geodesically
equivalent metrics given on a symmetric space are afnely equivalent.
Intuitively, one might expect a link between projective relatedness and holonomy type,
since if =

then (M, g) and (M, g) have the same holonomy type. Indeed, holonomy
theory can in some extent describe projective equivalence (see work of Hall [8] and for the
positive denite case [11]).
Matveev gave an algorithmhowto obtain a list of pairs of all possible geodesically equiva-
lent metrics. Hall and Lonie [10] have also constructed, using different approach, geodesically
equivalent 4-dimensional metrics g, g of Lorentz signature. Manifolds of constant curvature
allow geodesically equivalent metrics (see [1, 2, 16], etc.). Kiosak and Matveev [14] have
proved that every complete Einstein (Riemannian or pseudo-Riemannian) metric g of non-
constant curvature is geodesically rigid. So far there are no results in this area in the case of
Lie groups.
Our paper is organized as follows. In the Sect. 2 we classify left invariant Lorentz metrics
on 4-dimensional nilpotent Lie groups H
3
Rand G
4
(Theorems 2.1 and 2.2). This research
is motivated by paper of Lauret [15] where 3 and 4 dimensional Riemannian nilmanifolds
are classied. As expected, we found much more metrics than in the positive denite case.
Note that Cordero and Parker (see [4]) solved analogue problem for Lorentz 3-dimensional
Lie groups.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
In the Sect. 3 the geometry of the metrics is investigated. We calculate curvature tensor
(Tables 1 and 2) and holonomy groups (Table 3) of the metrics and investigate decompos-
ability of the metrics (Table 3). It is interesting that some of metrics have parallel null vector,
but are not decomposable. These are exactly pp-wave metrics.
Finally, in the Sect. 4 we nd projective classes of the metrics (Theorems 4.1 and 4.2).
We have found that some of metrics are geometrically rigid, while others have projectively
equivalent metrics that are also afnely equivalent. They are either decomposable metrics or
indecomposable metrics with parallel null vector. It is interesting that the afnely equivalent
metrics are also left invariant. We have also checked that in the positive denite case (metrics
from Lauret classication) all indecomposable metrics are geodesically rigid (Theorem 4.1).
Note that preliminaries with basic facts and denitions are given at the beginning of each
section.
2 Classication of left invariant metrics
Let (N, g) be a nilpotent Lie group with left invariant metric g and let n = Li eN be its Lie
algebra with the induced inner product that we denote by , . If not stated otherwise, we
assume that N is 4-dimensional and that both metric g and inner product , are of Lorentz
signature (+, +, +, ).
Since on nilpotent Lie group the exponential map exp : n N is diffeomorphism, we
have that N is diffeomorphic to R
n
and hence simply connected. As a consequence the groups
of automorphisms of Lie group and its algebra coincide, i.e. Aut (N) = Aut (n) ([27]).
Magnin [18] proved that, up to isomorphism, there are only two non-Abelian nilpotent
Lie algebras of dimension 4 : h
3
R and g
4
with corresponding Lie groups H
3
R and G
4
.
Algebra h
3
R is spanned by basis {x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
} with nonzero commutator
[x
1
, x
2
] = x
3
. (1)
The algebra h
3
R is 2-step nilpotent with two dimensional center Z(h
3
R) = L(x
4
, x
3
)
and one dimensional commutator subalgebra spanned by x
3
.
The algebra g
4
is spanned by basis {x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
} with nonzero commutators
[x
1
, x
2
] = x
3
, [x
1
, x
3
] = x
4
. (2)
The algebra g
4
is 3-step nilpotent with one dimensional center Z(g
4
) = L(x
4
) and two
dimensional commutator subalgebra
g

4
:= [g
4
, g
4
] = L(x
3
, x
4
).
In [7] Guediri showed that on a 2-step nilpotent Lie group, all left invariant pseudo-
Riemannian metrics are geodesically complete. In the same paper he found an example of a
non-complete left invariant Lorentz metric on a 3-step nilpotent Lie group that corresponds
to Lie algebra g
4
(special case of metric g

A
in Theorem 2.3).
Denote by Aut (n) the group of automorphisms of Lie algebra n, that is dened by
Aut (n) := {F : n n | F linear, [Fx, Fy] = F[x, y], x, y n}.
Denote by S
L
(n) set of non-equivalent Lorentz inner products (i.e. of signature
(+, +, +, )) of algebra n. With basis of Lie algebra n xed, the set S
L
(n) is identied
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
with symmetric matrices S of signature (3, 1) modulo the following action of the automor-
phism group
S F
T
SF,
F Aut (n).
Automorphisms of these groups are described in the following two lemmas.
Lemma 2.1 [15] The group Aut (g
4
) of automorphisms of Lie algebra g
4
, in basis
{x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
}, consists of real matrices of form:
Aut (g
4
) =
_

_
_
_
_
_
a
1
0 0 0
a
2
b
2
0 0
a
3
b
3
a
1
b
2
0
a
4
b
4
a
1
b
3
a
2
1
b
2
_
_
_
_

a
1
, b
2
= 0
_

_
. (3)
Lemma 2.2 [15] The group Aut (h
3
R) of automorphisms of Lie algebra h
3
R, in basis
{x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
}, consists of real matrices of form:
Aut (h
3
R) =
_
_
_
_
_
A 0 0
b
1
det A
b
2
0
_
_

A GL(2, R), b
1
, b
2
R
2
,
= 0, R
_
_
_
. (4)
Now we describe sets of non-equivalent Lorentz inner products S
L
(g
4
) and S
L
(h
3
R).
We use geometrical approach, having in mind that the center and the commutator subalgebra
are preserved by automorphisms of Lie algebra.
Theorem 2.1 The set S
L
(g
4
) of non-equivalent Lorentz inner product on algebra g
4
in basis
{x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
} is represented by the following matrices
S

A
=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 a b
0 0 b c
_
_
_
_
, S
A
=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 a b
0 0 b c
_
_
_
_
,
S

1
=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 0
0 1 0 0
_
_
_
_
, S

2
=
_
_
_
_
0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0 0
_
_
_
_
,
S

3
=
_
_
_
_
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
_
, S

4
=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
_
,
with > 0, b 0. Matrix A =
_
a b
b c
_
satises det A > 0 in S

A
and det A < 0 in S
A
.
Remark 2.1 In the positive denite case all inner products are represented by matrix S
A
with
a condition det A > 0 (see [15]).
Proof The idea is to consider the restriction of the inner product on two dimensional commu-
tator subalgebra g

4
. If the restriction is of signature (+, +) or (+, ), we get inner products
S

A
and S
A
, respectively. If the restriction is degenerate of signature (+, 0) then we discuss
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
the character of center Z(g
4
) g

4
. The products represented by matrices S

1
, S

2
and S

3
, S

4
correspond to null and non-null center, respectively.
Denote by S, S
T
= S arbitrary symmetric matrix of signature (3, 1). It represents inner
product , in basis {x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
}. In the same basis an automorphism F of algebra g
4
is
given by Lemma 2.1. In all the cases, we look for new basis { f
1
, f
2
, f
3
, f
4
} of the form
f
1
= a
1
x
1
+a
2
x
2
+a
3
x
3
+a
4
x
4
, f
2
= b
2
x
2
+b
3
x
3
+b
4
x
4
,
f
3
= a
1
b
2
x
3
+a
1
b
3
x
4
, f
4
= a
1
b
2
2
x
4
,
(5)
representing the columns of F, such that the inner product , in that basis
S
1
= F
T
SF is as simple as possible.
Note, that the signature of , ong

4
depends ondeterminant of lower-right 22 submatrix
A of matrix S.
Case 1 g

4
is of signature (+, +) (det A > 0).
Therefore, the orthogonal complement g

is of signature (+, ) and g

4
= g

4
g

.
Let {e
1
, e
2
} be an orthonormal basis of g

. The parameter t R of the hyperbolic rotation

f
1
= cosh t e
1
+sinh t e
2
, f
2
= sinh t e
1
+cosh t e
2
can be chosen in such a way that the rst coordinate of f
2
vanishes and therefore f
2
is of the
form (5). Such choice of f
1
, f
2
also determines basis { f
3
, f
4
} of g

4
. Therefore, in the new
basis the matrix of the inner product , is of the form S

A
. The sign comes from the fact
that hyperbolic rotation cannot change character of f
2
(i.e. si gn f
2
, f
2
). One can show that
inner products represented by matrices S

A
are mutually non-equivalent under the action of
F Aut (g
4
). However, the automorphism F with only nonzero parameters a
1
= 1, b
2
= 1
can change sign of parameter b in matrix A, so we have the condition b 0.
Case 2 g

4
is of signature (+, ) (det A < 0).
In this case the orthogonal complement g

is of signature (+, +). The proof is similar

to the previous case, but uses Euclidean rotation. However, there is no sign since all unit
vectors in g

are of the same character.

Case 3 g

4
is degenerate (det A = 0).
In this case the matrix A of restriction of , is of the form
A =
_
a

ac

ac c
_
. (6)
In g

4
there is a unique null vector N and all other vectors X g

4
are spacelike and orthogonal
to N :
N, N = 0, X, X = > 0, N, X = 0.
It is interesting that plane g

is also degenerate and

g

4
= L(N).
Therefore, sum g

+g

4
is three dimensional vector space, and does not span g
4
.
Case 3a The center of g
4
is null.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
This means that central vector x
4
satises 0 = x
4
, x
4
= c. Therefore, we get b = 0 and
the matrix of restriction of inner product is A =
_
0
0 0
_
. Matrix S reduces to
S =
_
_
_
_
p r e f
r q g h
e g 0
f h 0 0
_
_
_
_
, > 0.
Let f
3
= x
3
, f
4
= x
4
and f
1
= a
1
x
1
+a
2
x
2
+a
3
x
3
+a
4
x
4
. The condition that f
1
g

,
i.e. f
1
, f
3
= 0 = f
1
, f
4
is equivalent to
a
1
f +a
2
h = 0, a
1
e +a
2
g +a
3
= 0.
Suppose that eh f g = 0, so this system has solution for a
1
, a
2
with a
3
= 0 implying that
f
1
is not collinear with f
4
= x
4
. Let f
2
= b
2
x
2
+b
3
x
3
+b
4
x
4
. The condition f
1
, f
2
= 0
reduces to
a
4
h( f g eh) +a
3
(egh +hr + f (g
2
q)).
Under assumption h = 0 we can nd a
4
such that f
1
, f
2
= 0. Furthermore if h =
0, eh f g = 0 we can nd b
3
such that f
2
, f
3
= 0 and b
4
so that f
2
, f
2
= 0. Also
f
2
, f
4
= b
2
h = t = 0.
In the chosen basis { f
1
, f
2
, f
3
, f
4
} the inner product , has matrix
S

(, , t ) = F
T
SF =
_
_
_
_
0 0 0
0 0 0 t
0 0 0
0 t 0 0
_
_
_
_
,
where , > 0 and t = 0. From the relation
S

(
1
,
1
, t
1
) = F
T
S

(, , t )F, (7)
using direct and simple calculation we can nd F such that
1
= 1 = t
1
, and matrix of the
inner product reduces to S

1
.
If h = 0 we set f
3
= x
3
, f
4
= x
4
and nd
f
2
= b
2
x
2
+b
3
x
3
+b
4
x
4
g

.
We perform similar analysis to nd basis in which the inner product has matrix of the
form S

2
.
Finally, if eh f g = 0, we have (e, f ) = t (g, h) for some t R. In other words x
1
t x
2

g

. Therefore, we look for f

1
g

of the form f
1
= a
1
x
1
+a
2
x
2
+a
4
x
4
. Simple analysis
shows that the inner product also reduces to S

1
in this case.
Case 3b The center of g
4
is not null.
In this case we use similar procedure to showthat if g = 0 the inner product is represented
by matrix S

3
and if g = 0 it is represented by S

4
.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Theorem 2.2 The set S
L
(h
3
R) of non-equivalent Lorentz inner product on algebra h
3
R
in basis {x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
} is represented by the following matrices
S

=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 1
_
_
_
_
, S

=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 1
_
_
_
_
,
S
1
0
=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0
_
_
_
_
, S
2
0
=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1
_
_
_
_
, S
3
0
=
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
_
_
_
_
,
where , > 0.
Remark 2.2 In the positive denite case all nonequivalent inner products on h
3
R are
represented by matrix S = di ag(1, 1, , 1), > 0 (see [15]).
Proof We use similar approach as in case of algebra g
4
. Note that in this case the center of
algebra is Z = L(x
3
, x
4
) and the commutator is L(x
3
). We only briey describe the cases
which are easily geometrically distinguished.
Case 1 Z is of signature (+, +). In this case the inner product is represented by matrix S

.
Case 2 Z is of signature (+, ).
Case 2a If x
4
is not null, one can show that the inner product is of the type S

. The choice
of sign depends on the causality of the commutator subalgebra, i.e. si gn(x
4
, x
4
) = 1.
Case 2b If x
4
is null, the inner product can be represented by matrix S
1
0
.
Case 3 Z is degenerate plane, i.e. of signature (+, 0).
Case 3a If x
4
is snot null than we get inner product with matrix S
2
0
.
Case 3b If x
4
is null, one can show that using automorphisms of the algebra one can
transform matrix of the inner product into S
3
0
.
The inner product , on n gives rise to a left invariant metric g on the corresponding
Lie group. In the sequel we nd coordinate description of metrics dened by inner product
from Theorems 2.1 and 2.2.
If X
1
, X
2
, X
3
, X
4
are left invariant vector elds on G
4
dened by x
1
, x
2
, x
3
, x
4
g
4
, for
global coordinates (x, y, z, w) on G
4
we have the relations
X
1
=

x
, X
2
=

y
+ x

z
+
x
2
2

w
, (8)
X
3
=

z
+ x

w
, X
4
=

w
.
Similarly, in global coordinates (x, y, z, w) on H
3
R we have left invariant vector elds:
X
1
=

x
, X
2
=

y
+ x

z
, (9)
X
3
=

z
, X
4
=

w
.
Now, by a straightforward computation, we can prove two following theorems.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Theorem 2.3 Each left invariant Lorentz metric on the group G
4
, up to an automorphism
of G
4
, is isometric to one of the following
g

A
= dx
2
dy
2
+a(xdy dz)
2
b(xdy dz)(2dw 2xdz + x
2
dy)
+
c
4
(2dw + x(xdy 2dz))
2
;
g
A
= dx
2
+dy
2
+a(xdy dz)
2
b(xdy dz)(2dw 2xdz + x
2
dy)
+
c
4
(2dw + x(xdy 2dz))
2
;
g

1
= dx
2
+2dwdy + xdy(xdy 2dz) +(xdy dz)
2
;
g

2
= 2dwdx +dy
2
+ xdx(xdy 2dz) +(xdy dz)
2
;
g

3
= dy
2
2dx(xdy dz) +

4
(2dw + x(xdy 2dz))
2
;
g

4
= dx
2
2dy(xdy dz) +

4
(2dw + x(xdy 2dz))
2
.
Theorem 2.4 Each left invariant Lorentz metric on the group H
3
R, up to an automorphism
of H
3
R, is isometric to one of the following
g

= dx
2
dy
2
+(xdy dz)
2
+dw
2
;
g

= dx
2
+dy
2
(xdy dz)
2
dw
2
;
g
1
0
= dx
2
+dy
2
2xdydw +2dzdw;
g
2
0
= dx
2
2xdy
2
+dw
2
+2dydz;
g
3
0
= dx
2
+2dydw +(xdy dz)
2
.
3 Curvature and holonomy of metrics
In this section we calculate the components of curvature tensor, Ricci tensor and scalar
curvature. We use curvature tensor from Tables 1 and 2 to study geodesically equivalent met-
rics using Matveevs algorithm [21]. Another approach in studying geodesical equivalence is
using holonomy (see [10]) which we also calculate. Using holonomy, we answer the question
of decomposability of metrics.
To calculate Levi-Civita connection of metric g we use Koszuls formula:
2g (
X
Y, Z) = X.g (Y, Z) Y.g (Z, X) Z.g (X, Y)
+g ([X, Y], Z) g ([Y, Z], X) + g ([Z, X], Y) .
Since vector elds and metric on the Lie group are left invariant, the components in the rst
row of Koszuls formula vanish.
We start from the commutators (1) or (2) and particular inner product , of the algebra
(Theorems 2.1 and 2.2) given by symmetric matrix S. In left invariant basis {X
1
, X
2
, X
3
, X
4
}
the metric g has matrix S in every point on Lie group. Denote by v =
X
i
X
j
, i, j = 1, . . . , 4
the covariant derivative we want to calculate. From Koszuls formula we know

k
:= g (v, X
k
) =
1
2
_
g
_
[X
i
, X
j
], X
k
_
g
_
[X
j
, X
k
], X
i
_
+ g
_
[X
k
, X
i
], X
j
__
.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Let [v] denote the column of coordinates of vector v in basis {X
1
, X
2
, X
3
, X
4
}. Then we
have
S[v] = (
1
,
2
,
3
,
4
)
T
and hence [v] = S
1
(
1
,
2
,
3
,
4
)
T
.
In this way we obtain vectors v =
X
i
X
j
, i.e. the Levi-Civita connection.
For curvature tensor we use the formula
R(X, Y)Z =
X
(
Y
Z)
Y
(
X
Z)
[X,Y]
Z.
Note that the curvature operators R(X
i
, X
j
), i, j = 1, . . . , 4 belong to algebra so(S) pre-
serving the metric, i.e.
R(X
i
, X
j
)
T
S + SR(X
i
, X
j
) = 0.
The Ricci curvature is dened as trace of the operator
(X, Y) = Tr(Z R(Z, X)Y),
with components
i j
= (X
i
, X
j
). Scalar curvature is the trace of the Ricci operator
Scal =

i
i
=

i, j
g
i j

j i
,
where we have used the inverse {g
i j
} = S
1
of the metric to raise the index and obtain Ricci
operator.
3.1 Case of group G
4
See Table 1.
3.2 Case of group H
3
R
See Table 2.
3.3 Holonomy
Now we calculate holonomy algebras hol(g) of each metric g from Theorems 2.3 and
2.4. Note that, since nilpotent group is simply connected, the restricted holonomy group
Hol
0
(N, g) coincides with full holonomy group Hol(N, g). According to Ambrose-Singer
theoremthe algebra hol(g) is generated by curvature operators R(X
i
, X
j
) and their covariant
derivatives of any order. We know that holonomy algebra is subalgebra of isometry algebra,
i.e.
hol(g) so(S) = {A | A
T
S + SA = 0},
where S denotes the matrixof the metric g. Since covariant derivatives andcurvature operators
are known, we use formula
(
X
m
R(X
k
, X
l
))(X
j
) =
X
m
(R(X
k
, X
l
)(X
j
)) R(X
k
, X
l
)(
X
m
X
j
),
to calculate derivative
X
m
R(X
k
, X
l
) of curvature operator. Higher order derivatives are
calculated using similar formula.
The results are summarized in the following Table 3.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Table 1 Curvature of left invariant metrics on Lie group G
4
Metric g Curvature tensor
R
l
i j k
(non-vanishing
components)
Ricci tensor
i j
Scalar curvature
g

A
R
2
112
=
3
2
4
a R
1
212
=
3
1
4
a
11
=
c
2
+
2
ad
2d

1
(c
2
+
2
ad)
2d
g
A
R
3
112
=
3
4d
bc R
1
312
=
1
b
22
=

1
a
2
R
4
112
=
ac4b
2
4d
R
1
412
=

1
4
c
23
=

1
b
2
R
2
113
=
2
b R
1
213
=
1
b
33
=

1
(
2
a
2
dcd+cb
2
)
2d
R
3
113
=
3c
2

2
ad
4d
R
1
313
=

1
(3cdb
2
c
2
a
2
d)
4d

34
=

1
b(c
2
+
2
ad)
2d
R
4
113
=
bc
d
R
1
413
=

1
b
4d
(
2
c +ad)
44
=

1
(
2
b
2
d+c
3
)
2d
R
2
114
=

2
4
c R
1
214
=

1
4
c
R
3
114
=

2
4
b R
1
314
=

1
b(
2
c
2
+ad)
4d
R
4
114
=
c
2
4d
R
1
414
=

1
(c
3
+
2
b
2
d)
4d
R
3
224
=

1
4
b
R
2
324
=

1

2
4
ab R
2
424
=

1

2
4
b
2
R
3
324
=

1
4d
b
2
c R
3
424
=

1
4d
bc
2
R
4
324
=

1
4d
abc R
4
424
=

1
4d
b
2
c
R
3
223
=

1
4
a
R
2
323
=

1

2
4
a
2
R
2
423
=

1

2
4
b
2
R
3
323
=

1
(b
3
bd)
4d
R
3
423
=

1
(b
3
bd)
4d
R
4
323
=

1
4d
abc R
4
423
=

1
(b
3
bd)
4d
R
3
234
=

1
4
c
R
4
234
=

1
2
b
R
2
334
=

1

2
(b
2
d)
4
R
2
434
=

1

2
4
bc
R
3
334
=

1
4d
bc
2
R
3
434
=

1
4d
c
3
R
4
334
=

1
4d
ac
2
R
4
434
=

1
4d
bc
2
g

1
R
4
112
=
(31)(+1)
4
R
3
223
=
(+1)
2
4

22
=

2
1
2
0
R
1
212
=
(31)(+1)
4
R
4
323
=
(+1)
2
4
g

2
R
2
112
=
3
4
R
3
113
=

4

11
=

2
0
R
4
212
=
3
4
R
4
313
=

2
4
g

3
R
4
112
=
1
2
R
1
113
=
3
4

13
=

2

2
R
3
412
=

2
R
3
313
=
3
4

44
=

2
2
R
2
114
=

2
R
4
314
=

4
R
3
214
=

2
R
1
414
=

2
4
R
4
134
=

4
R
3
434
=

2
4
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Table 1 continued
Metric g Curvature tensor
R
l
i j k
(non-vanishing
components)
Ricci tensor
i j
Scalar curvature
g

4
R
2
113
=
3
4
R
4
223
=
1
2

24
=

2
0
R
1
313
=
3
4
R
3
423
=

2

33
=

2
R
2
224
=

2
R
4
334
=

4
R
3
324
=

2
R
2
434
=

2
4
Three families of inner products S
A
and S

A
can be written using the matrix
S =
_
_
_

1
0 0 0
0
2
0 0
0 0 a b
0 0 b c
_
_
_
,
with
1
,
2
{1, 1} and si gn(det A) =
1

2
. The corresponding metrics written in left invariant coordinate
basis are used in the Table above. Also, we denoted by d = ac b
2
= det A
Table 2 Curvature of left
invariant metrics on Lie group
H
3
R
Metric g Curvature tensor R
l
i j k
(non-vanishing
components)
Ricci tensor
i j
Scalar
curvature
g

R
2
112
=
3
4

11
=

2

2
R
1
212
=
3
4

22
=

2
R
3
113
=

4

33
=

2
2
R
1
313
=

2
4
R
3
223
=

4
R
2
323
=

2
4
g

R
2
112
=
3
4

11
=

2
R
1
212
=
3
4

22
=

2
R
3
113
=

4

33
=

2
2
R
1
313
=

2
4
R
3
223
=

4
R
2
323
=

2
4
g
1
0
R
3
114
=
1
4

44
=
1
2
0
R
3
224
=
1
4
R
1
414
=
1
4
R
2
424
=
1
4
g
2
0
Flat 0
g
3
0
R
4
112
=
3
4

22
=
1
2
0
R
1
212
=
3
4
R
4
323
=
1
4
R
3
232
=
1
4
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Table 3 Holonomy of left invariant metrics on Lie groups G
4
and H
3
R
Group Metric Hol (g) Not.
a
Basis Parallel
vector
Decomposable
G
4
g
A
so(3, 1) R15 No No
g

1
R
2
R8 X
1
X
4
, X
3
X
4
X
4
No
g

2
R
2
R8 X
2
X
4
, X
3
X
4
X
4
No
g

3
so(3, 1) R15 No No
g

4
so(3, 1) R15 No No
H
3
R g

so(2, 1) R10 X
1
X
2
, X
1
X
3
, X
2
X
3
X
4
Yes
g
+

so(3) R13 X
1
X
2
, X
1
X
3
, X
2
X
3
X
4
Yes
g

so(2, 1) R10 X
1
X
2
, X
1
X
3
, X
2
X
3
X
4
Yes
g
1
0
R
2
R8 X
1
X
3
, X
2
X
3
X
3
No
g
2
0
Flat
g
3
0
R
2
R8 X
1
X
4
, X
3
X
4
X
4
No
a
Used notation is as found in [25]
Remark 3.1 It is straightforward to calculate, using the same approach, that all left invariant
positive denite metrics on group G
4
have full holonomy algebra so(4) and hence they are
indecomposable. However, all left invariant metrics on group H
3
Rhave holonomy algebra
so(3) and hence all these metrics split into direct sum of 3-dimensional and 1-dimensional
submanifold.
Recall that a metric g is called pp-wave metric if there exists a parallel null vector eld V
such that R(U, W) = 0 for all U, W V

. Such metrics have great importance in gravitation

(see [3]). It is easy to check the following corollary.
Corollary 3.1 All left invariant metrics on nilpotent 4-dimensional Lie groups with
holonomy algebra R
2
are homogenous pp-wave metrics.
Now we discuss decomposability of metrics.
In the case of metrics with holonomy R
2
a parallel null global vector eld is preserved.
Therefore, the holonomy preserves only degenerate subspaces, i.e. acts indecomposably and
it follows from the results of Wu (see [30]), that these metrics are indecomposable.
In the case of holonomy so(2, 1) and so(3), the parallel global vector eld is not null.
That vector eld and its orthogonal complement are nondegenerate and preserved by the
holonomy. Again, by results of Wu, the corresponding metrics are decomposable into sum
of one-dimensional and three-dimensional manifold.
Regarding projective equivalence, the most interesting cases are metrics with full
holonomy so(3, 1). They are discussed at the end of the next section.
4 Projective equivalence
In this section we look for metrics that are geodesically equivalent to the left invariant metrics
from Theorems 2.3 and 2.4.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
We work in tensor notations with the background metric g. That means, we sum with
respect to repeating indexes, use g for raising and lowering indices and use the Levi Civita
connection of g for covariant differentiation.
As it was already known to Levi-Civita [17], two connections = {
i
j k
} and

= {

i
j k
}
have the same unparameterized geodesics, if and only if their difference is pure trace: there
exists a (0, 1)-tensor such that

i
j k
=
i
j k
+
i
k

j
+
i
j

k
. (10)
The reparametrization of the geodesics for and

connected by (10) is done according to the
following rule: for a parameterized geodesic () of

, the curve ((t )) is a parameterized
geodesic of , if and only if the parameter transformation (t ) satises the following ODE:

=
1
2
d
dt
_
log

d
dt

_
. (11)
We denote by the velocity vector of with respect to the parameter t .
If and

related by (10) are Levi-Civita connections of metrics g and g, respectively,
then one can nd explicitly (following Levi-Civita [17]) a function on the manifold such
that its differential
,i
coincides with the covector
i
. Indeed, contracting (10) with respect to
i and j , we obtain

i
=

i
+(n+1)
i
. Fromthe other side, for the Levi-Civita connection
of a metric g we have

k
=
1
2
log|det(g)|
x
k
. Thus

i
=
1
2(n +1)

x
i
log

det( g)
det(g)

=
,i
(12)
for the function : M R given by
:=
1
2(n +1)
log

det( g)
det(g)

. (13)
In particular, the derivative of
i
is symmetric:
i, j
=
j,i
.
The formula (10) implies that two metrics g and g are geodesically equivalent if and only
if for function given by (13) we have
g
i j ;k
2 g
i j

k
g
i k

j
g
j k

i
= 0, (14)
where semi-colon denotes the covariant derivative with respect to the connection . Indeed,
the left-hand side of this equation is the covariant derivative with respect to

, and vanishes
if and only if

is the Levi-Civita connection for g.
Consider the projective Weyl tensor (introduced in [28])
W
i
j kl
:= R
i
j kl

1
n 1
_

i
l
R
j k

i
k
R
jl
_
,
where R
i
j kl
and R
j k
are components of curvature and Ricci tensor of manifold (M
n
, g). Weyl
has shown that the projective Weyl tensor does not depend on choice of connection within
the projective class: if the connections and

are related by the formula (10) then their
projective Weyl tensors coincide. Note that the converse is not true (see [12]).
In order to nd the projective class of our 4-dimensional metrics, we use the formula
2g
a(i
W
j )
akl
= g
ab
W
(i
ab[l

j )
k]
, (15)
proposed by Matveev in [21], where the brackets [ ] denote the skew-symmetrization
without division, and the brackets ( ) denote the symmetrization without division.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Every metric g geodesically equivalent to g has the same projective Weyl tensor as g. We
view the equation (15) as the system of homogeneous linear equations on the components of
g; every metric g geodesically equivalent to g satises this system of equations (15) (with
the same coefcients W
i
j kl
!). At the point x
0
, this is a system of 10 unknowns g(x
0
)
i j
. Since
the system is symmetric in i, j and skew-symmetric in k, l, the system contains 60 equations
(actually, less because of certain hidden symmetries inside). Since this system has at least
one nontrivial solution, namely g(x
0
)
i j
, its rank is at most 9.
We stress that already in dimension 4 this system is quite complicated, and it will be less
useful in higher dimensions.
Let g
A
, g

i
, i = 1, . . . , 4 denote the left invariant metrics on Lie group G
4
from Theorem
2.3 and g

, g

, g
i
0
, i = 1, 2, 3 denote left invariant metrics on Lie group H
3
R from
Theorem 2.4. We are now ready to prove the following theorems.
Theorem 4.1 Let g and g be geodesically equivalent metrics on a group G
4
and g is left
invariant. Then the following possibilities hold:
a) If g is of type g

1
, g

2
then g and g are afnely equivalent. The family of metrics g is two
dimensional. Every metric g is left invariant and of Lorentz signature.
b) If g is of type g
A
, g

3
, g

4
it is geodesically rigid, i.e. g = cg, c R.
Theorem 4.2 Let g and g be geodesically equivalent metrics on a group H
3
Rand g = g
2
0
is left invariant. Then g is afnely equivalent to g and left-invariant. The family of metrics
g is two dimensional. If g is indecomposable i.e. of type g
1
0
or g
3
0
, the metric g is also of
Lorentz signature, otherwise it may change signature.
General algorithm:
To nd all metrics g that are projectively equivalent to g we rst look for solutions of the
homogeneous system of equations (15). The condition (15) is necessary but not sufcient,
so we call such metrics candidates. Then, we check if candidate satises the condition (14)
which is sufcient for projective equivalence. If all candidates satisfying condition (14) are
proportional to g, by result of Weil, the metric g is geodesically rigid. If function satisfying
relations (14) is constant, then g is afnely equivalent to g.
Proof of Theorem 4.1 After a long, but straightforward computations we obtain all candi-
dates which are given in the second column of the following tabulated list (Table 4).
From the Table, we can see that for metrics of type g
A
, g

3
, g

4
the only candidates g are
homothetic to g. From the result of Weyl (see [28]) they are proportional to g, i.e. of the
form g = cg, c = const . These metrics are geodesically rigid and this completes the proof
of case b) of the Theorem.
We demonstrate the rest of the proof in the case of metric g = g

1
. The proof for other
metrics is analogous. First, consider the case =
1
3
. In order to use the relation (14) we
continue our computations in the coordinate basis (8). In that basis matrices of metric g and
the candidate metric g are
g =
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 x
2
(1 +) x(1 +) 1
0 x(1 +) 0
0 1 0 0
_
_
_
_
, (16)
g =
_
_
_
_
p 0 0 0
0 p
2
q + px
2
(1 +) px(1 +) p
0 px(1 +) p 0
0 p 0 0
_
_
_
_
, (17)
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Table 4 Projectively equivalent metrics on Lie groups G
4
Original metric (g) Candidate metrics Equivalent metric
g
A
=
_
_
_

1
0 0 0
0
2
0 0
0 0 a b
0 0 b c
_
_
_
p
_
_
_

1
0 0 0
0
2
0 0
0 0 a b
0 0 b c
_
_
_
c
1
_
_
_

1
0 0 0
0
2
0 0
0 0 a b
0 0 b c
_
_
_

1
,
2
{1, 1}
g

1
=
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 0
0 1 0 0
_
_
_
p
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 pq 0 1
0 0 0
0 1 0 0
_
_
_
_
_
_
c
1
0 0 0
0 c
2
0 c
1
0 0 c
1
0
0 c
1
0 0
_
_
_
cases =
1
3
and =
1
3
_
_
_
_
q pqr 0 0
pqr p
2
(qr
2
s) 0 p
0 0
1
3
p 0
0 p 0 0
_
_
_
_
g

2
=
_
_
_
0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0 0
_
_
_
p
_
_
_
pq 0 0 1
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0 0
_
_
_
_
_
_
c
2
0 0 c
1
0 c
1
0 0
0 0 c
1
0
c
1
0 0 0
_
_
_
g

3
=
_
_
_
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
p
_
_
_
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
c
1
_
_
_
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
g

4
=
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
p
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
c
1
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
_
In the Table, we denote by c
1
, c
2
R, c
1
= 0 constants and by p, q, r, s C

(G
4
) functions on Lie group
assuming p, q C

(G
4
), p = 0. Their components satisfy the relations
g
ab
= pg
ab
, if (a, b) = (2, 2), (18)
g
22
= pg
22
qp
2
. (19)
Their determinants are
det g = , det g = p
4
. (20)
We combine (13) and (20) to obtain
=
2
5
log p,
d
=
2
5
p
d
p
, (21)
where
d
and p
d
, d = 1, . . . , 4 denote partial derivatives with respect to coordinates
x, y, z, w, respectively. Now we use the formula

a
bd
=
1
2
g
am
_
g
mb
x
d
+
g
md
x
b

g
bd
x
m
_
(22)
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
to calculate Christoffel symbols of connection of g :

1
22
=
4
12
=
4
21
= (1 +)x,

1
23
=
1
32
=
4
13
=
4
31
=
1 +
2
,

4
12
=
4
21
=

2
1
2
x,

3
12
=
3
21
=
+1
2
,

a
bd
= 0 in other cases.
(23)
In the rest of the proof we compute all covariant derivatives with respect to the Levi-Civita
connection of g. For (a, b) = (1, 1) the covariant derivation of (18) gives
g
11;d
= p
d
(24)
and using (21), the relation (14) thus reads
g
11;d
= 2p
d
+2 g
1d

1
. (25)
For d = 1 the relations (21), (24) and (25) imply p
1
= 0. Similarly, for 1 < d 4 we
obtain p
d
= 0. Consequently, one can conclude p = const and this implies
d
= 0. For
(a, b) = (2, 2), using (23) the covariant derivation of (19) gives
g
22;d
= p
2
q
d
(26)
and using (21) and
d
= 0, the relation (14) thus reads
g
22;d
= 2 g
22

d
+2 g
2d

2
= 0. (27)
Hence, q = const and our metric g is afnely equivalent to g.
Now we consider the case =
1
3
. Then the metrics g and g in coordinate basis are given
by the matrices
g =
_
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0
4
3
x
2

4
3
x 1
0
4
3
x
1
3
0
0 1 0 0
_
_
_
_
, (28)
g =
_
_
_
_
q pqr 0 0
pqr p
2
(qr
2
s) +
4
3
px
2

4
3
px p
0
4
3
px
1
3
p 0
0 p 0 0
_
_
_
_
, (29)
assuming p, q, r, s C

(G
4
), p, q = 0. These metrics satisfy the following relation
g = pg +
_
_
_
_
q p pqr 0 0
pqr p
2
(qr
2
s) 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
_
_
_
_
, (30)
We use (28), (29) to compute their determinants
det g =
1
3
, det g =
1
3
p
3
q. (31)
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Consequently, we combine (13) and (31) to obtain
=
3
10
log p +
1
10
log q, (32)

d
=
3
10
p
d
p
+
1
10
q
d
q
. (33)
Now we use the formula (22), (28) to compute Christoffel symbols corresponding to the
metric g

1
22
=
4
12
=
4
21
=
4
3
x,

1
23
=
1
32
=
4
13
=
4
31
=
2
3
, (34)

3
12
=
3
21
= 2,

a
bd
= 0 in other cases.
One can write the relation (30) in the following way
g = pg +(q p)e
1
e
1
2pqre
1
e
2
+ p
2
(qr
2
s)e
2
e
2
. (35)
Using (34) the covariant derivation of (35) implies

d
g = p
d
g +(q
d
p
d
)e
1
e
1
2(q p)
1
dj
e
j
e
1
2( p
d
qr + pq
d
r + pqr
d
)e
1
e
2
+2pqr
1
dj
e
j
e
2
(36)
+(2pp
d
(qr
2
s) + p
2
(q
d
r
2
2qrr
d
s
d
))e
2
e
2
.
Therefore, for (a, b) = (4, 4) the relation (36) gives
g
44;d
= p
d
g
44
= 0 (37)
and using (33) the relation (14) thus reads
g
44;d
= 2 g
4d

4
. (38)
For d = 2 it is obvious that
4
= 0. For (a, b) = (4, 3), the relation (36) gives
g
43;d
= p
d
g
43
= 0, (39)
and using (33), (36), (39), the relation (14) thus reads
g
43;d
= g
4d

3
. (40)
Hence, for d = 2 we get
3
= 0. In a similar way for (a, b) = (4, 2) we obtain
g
42;d
= 2 g
42

d
+ g
4d

2
,
g
42;d
= p
d
,
and consequently for d = 1, 2, 3, 4 it follows
p
1
= 2p
1
, p
2
= 3p
2
, p
3
= 0, p
4
= 0, (41)
respectively. We choose (a, b, d) = (4, 1, 2) and (a, b, d) = (3, 3, 2) to obtain

1
= 0, p
2
= 2p
2
. (42)
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Table 5 Projectively equivalent metrics on Lie group H
3
R
Original metric (g) Candidate metrics Equivalent metric
g

=
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 1
_
_
_
_
_
_
p 0 0 0
0 p 0 0
0 0 p 0
0 0 0 q
_
_
_
_
_
_
c
1
0 0 0
0 c
1
0 0
0 0 c
1
0
0 0 0 c
2
_
_
_
g

=
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 1
_
_
_
_
_
_
p 0 0 0
0 p 0 0
0 0 p 0
0 0 0 q
_
_
_
_
_
_
c
1
0 0 0
0 c
1
0 0
0 0 c
1
0
0 0 0 c
2
_
_
_
g
1
0
=
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
p 0 0 0
0 p 0 0
0 0 0 p
0 0 p p
2
q
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
c
1
0 0 0
0 c
1
0 0
0 0 0 c
1
0 0 c
1
c
2
_
_
_
g
3
0
=
_
_
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
p 0 0 0
0 p
2
q 0 p
0 0 p 0
0 p 0 0
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
c
1
0 0 0
0 c
2
0 c
1
0 0 c
1
0
0 c
1
0 0
_
_
_
In the Table , we denote by c
1
, c
2
R, c
1
= 0 constants and by p, q C

(H
3
R) functions on Lie group
Now we combine (41) to conclude
p
d
= 0,
d
= 0 for d = 1, . . . , 4, i.e. p = const. (43)
The same procedure for (a, b) = (1, 1) gives
q = const. (44)
By previous computation, it is easy to conclude that
r
1
= r
4
= 0, r
2
=
4
3
q p
pq
x, r
3
=
2
3
q p
pq
. (45)
By differentiating (45) once again, we obtain
r
12
= 0, r
21
=
r
2
x
=
4
3
q p
pq
.
Therefore we derive q = p, as r C

(G
4
), and consequently (45) implies r = const . In a
similar way using (a, b) = (2, 2) we conclude s = const and r = 0.
Since p, q, s are constant ( p, q = 0) and r = 0 we conclude that for =
1
3
the metric g
is the same as in the previous case. Moreover, g is afnely equivalent to g.
Proof of Theorem 4.2 The proof is similar to the proof of the previous theorem. We give
only the tabulated list with candidate metrics (the second column) and projectively equivalent
metrics (the third column) (Table 5).
Remark 4.1 Using the same algorithm, we get the result for positive denite left invariant
metrics on G
4
and H
3
R(see Lauret classication [15]). In the case of group G
4
all metrics
are geometrically rigid. In the case H
3
R all metrics are decomposable and hence trivially
admit two dimensional family of afnely equivalent metrics, that are also left invariant.
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
Remark 4.2 Note that indecomposable left invariant metrics admitting afnely equivalent
metric have holonomy algebra R
2
and therefore have a parallel null vector of the form
v = v

. The family of afnely equivalent metric is then given by

g = g +
_
v

_
,
, R, where X

denotes vectors of dual basis.

Remark 4.3 One can check that in all cases, afnely equivalent metrics g and g, that are
not proportional, are related by an automorphism of the group. This means that these groups
(N, g) posses 1-parameter family of automorphisms that are not isometries, but preserve
geodesics.
Now we compare our work with results of Hall and Lonie (see [10]). Their results imply
that in the case of metrics with holonomy R8 and R13 if there exist projectively equivalent
metrics, they are afnely equivalent, which is the result that we get in Theorems 4.1 and 4.2.
But we were able to prove more: the space of such metrics is only 2-dimensional. Moreover,
the results of Hall and Lonie are of little help in the case of full holonomy R15. In that case
one has to check existence of projectively equivalent metrics directly, for example using the
proposed algorithm.
Acknowledgments This research is partially supported by East-Partner-program of DAAD. The research
of the second and the third authors are also partially supported within the project 174012 through the Ministry
of Education and Science of the Republic of Serbia. We would like to express our gratitude to V. Matveev for
his hospitality and support during our visits to Friedrich-Schiller-University of Jena. We are grateful to G. S.
Hall, V. Matveev and V. Kiosak for useful discussions and clarications of many details in the topic of our
research.
References
1. Beltrami, E.: Saggio di interpetazione della geometria non-euclidea, Giornale di matematiche vol. VI
(1868)
2. Beltrami, E.: Teoria fondamentale degli spazii di curvatura costante. Annali di Mat., ser II 2, 232255
(1868)
3. Blau, M., OLoughlin, M.: Homogenous plane waves. Nucl. Phys. B654, 135176 (2003)
4. Cordero, L.A., Parker, P.E.: Left-invariant Lorentz metrics on 3-dimensional Lie groups. Rend. Mat. Appl.
17, 129155 (1997)
5. Cordero, L.A., Parker, P.E.: Isometry groups of pseudoriemannian 2-step nilpotent Lie groups. Houst. J.
Math 35(1), 4972 (2009)
6. Gilkey, P.B.: Geometric Properties of Natural Operators Dened by the Riemann Curvature Tensor. World
Scientic Publishing Co., viii-306 pp (2001)
7. Guediri, M.: Sur la compltude des pseudo-mtriques invariantes gauche sur les groupes de Lie nilpo-
tents. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Pol. Torino 52, 371376 (1994)
8. Hall, G.S.: Connections and symmetries in space-times. Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 20, 399406 (1988)
9. Hall, G.S., Lonie, D.P.: Geodesic equivalence of Einstein spaces in general relativity. Class. Quantum
Gravity 26, 125009 (2009)
10. Hall, G.S., Lonie, D.P.: Projective structure and Holonomy in 4-dimensional Lorentz manifolds. arXiv:
1006.5023vl [gr-qc] 25 Jun 2010
11. Hall, G.S., Wang, Z.: Projective structure in 4-dimensional manifolds with positive denite metrics. J.
Geom. Phys. 62, 449463 (2012)
12. Hall, G.S.: On the Converse of Weyls Conformal and Projective Theorems, to appear in Publications de
linstitut Mathmatique
13. Homolya, S.Z., Kowalski, O.: Simply connected two-step homogeneous nilmanifolds of dimension 5.
Note di Matematica 26(1), 6977 (2006)
14. Kiosak, V., Matveev, V.S.: Complete Einstein metrics are geodesically rigid. Commun. Math. Phys.
289(1), 383400 (2009)
1 3
Author's personal copy
Geom Dedicata
15. Lauret, J.: Homogeneous nilmanifolds of dimension 3 and 4. Geom. Dedicata 68, 145155 (1997)
16. Lagrange, J.L.: Sur la construction des cartes gographiques, Novaux Mmoires de lAcadmie des
Sciences et Bell-Lettres de Berlin (1779)
17. Levi-Civita, T.: Sulle trasformazioni delle equazioni dinamiche. Ann. di Math. 24, 255300 (1896)
18. Magnin, L.: Sur les algbres de Lie nilpotents de dimension 7. J. Geom. Phys. 3(1), 119 (1986)
19. Matveev, V.S., Topalov, P.J.: Trajectory equivalence and corresponding integrals. Regul. Chaotic Dyn.
3(2), 3045 (1998)
20. Matveev, V.S., Topalov, P.J.: Geodesic equivalence via integrability. Geom. Dedicata 96, 91115 (2003)
21. Matveev, V.: Geodesically equivalent metrics in general relativity. J. Geom. Phys. 62(3), 675691 (2012)
22. Mike, J., Vanurov, A., Hinterleitner, I.: Geodesic Mappings and Some Generalizations. Palack Uni-
versity, Olomouc (2009)
23. Milnor, J.: Curvatures of left invariant metrics on Lie groups. Adv. Math. 21(3), 293329 (1976)
24. Rahmani, S.: Metriques de Lorentz sur les groupes de Lie unimodulaires de dimension 3. J. Geom. Phys.
9, 295302 (1992)
25. Schell, J.F.: Classication of four-dimensional Riemannian spaces. J. Math. Phys. 2, 202 (1961)
26. Sinjukov, N.S.: On geodesic mappings of Riemannian spaces onto symmetric Riemannian spaces. Dokl.
Akad. Nauk SSSR (N.S.) 98, 2123 (1954)
27. Warner, F.W.: Foundations of Differentiable Manifolds and Lie Groups. Glenview:Scott, Foresman (1971)
28. Weyl, H.: Zur Innitesimalgeometrie: Einordnung der projektiven und der konformen Auffasung,
Nachrichten von der K. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gttingen Mathematisch-Physikalische
Klasse, (1921); Selecta Herman Weyl. Birkhuser Verlag, Basel und Stutgart (1956)
29. Weyl, H.: Geometrie und Physik, Die Naturwissenschaftler 19 (1931), 4958, Herman Weyl Gesammelte
Abhandlungen, band 3, Springer, Berlin (1968)
30. Wu, H.: Holonomy groups of indenite metrics. Pac. J. Math. 20(2), 351392 (1967)
1 3
Author's personal copy