a “magic” approach to octonionic
Rosenfeld spaces
12 December 2022
Alessio Marrania, Daniele Corradettib, David Chesterc,
Raymond Aschheimc, Klee Irwinc
a Instituto de Física Teorica, Departamento de Física,
Universidad de Murcia, Campus de Espinardo, E-30100, Spain
email: alessio.marrani@um.es
b Universidade do Algarve, Departamento de Matemática,
Campus de Gambelas, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
email: a55944@ualg.pt
c Quantum Gravity Research,
Topanga Canyon Rd 101 S., California CA 90290, USA
email: DavidC@QuantumGravityResearch.org;
Raymond@QuantumGravityResearch.org;
Klee@QuantumGravityResearch.org
In his study on the geometry of Lie groups, Rosenfeld postulated a strict relation between all
real forms of exceptional Lie groups and the isometries of projective and hyperbolic spaces over
the (rank-2) tensor product of Hurwitz algebras taken with appropriate conjugations. Unfor-
tunately, the procedure carried out by Rosenfeld was not rigorous, since many of the theorems
he had been using do not actually hold true in the case of algebras that are not alternative nor
power-associative. A more rigorous approach to the definition of all the planes presented more
than thirty years ago by Rosenfeld in terms of their isometry group, can be considered within
the theory of coset manifolds, which we exploit in this work, by making use of all real forms
of Magic Squares of order three and two over Hurwitz normed division algebras and their split
versions. Within our analysis, we find 7 pseudo-Riemannian symmetric coset manifolds which
seemingly cannot have any interpretation within Rosenfeld’s framework. We carry out a similar
analysis for Rosenfeld lines, obtaining that there are a number of pseudo-Riemannian symmetric
cosets which do not have any interpretation à la Rosenfeld.
1
arXiv:2212.06426v1 [math.RA] 13 Dec 2022
Contents
1 Introduction
3
2 Real forms of Magic Squares of order 3 and 2
4
2.1 Hurwitz algebras and their split versions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
2.2 Trialities and derivations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
2.3 Euclidean and Lorentzian simple rank-3 Jordan algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
2.4 Real forms of the Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
2.5 Magic Square of order 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
2.6 Octonionic entries of Magic Squares of order 2 and 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
3 “Magic” formulæ for Rosenfeld planes
9
3.1 Coset manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
3.2
“Magic” formulæ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
4 Octonionic Rosenfeld planes
12
4.1 O ' R⊗ O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12
4.2 C⊗ O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
4.3 H⊗ O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
4.4 O⊗ O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
5 “Magic” formulæ for Rosenfeld lines
16
6 Octonionic Rosenfeld lines
19
6.1 O ' R⊗ O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
6.2 C⊗ O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
6.3 H⊗ O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
6.4 O⊗ O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
7 Conclusions
23
2
1
Introduction
Around the half of the XX century, geometric investigations on the octonionic plane gave rise
to a fruitful mathematical activity, culminating into the formulation of Tits-Freudenthal Magic
Square [Fr65, Ti]. The Magic Square is an array of Lie algebras, whose entries are obtained
from two Hurwitz algebras1 and enjoy multiple geometric and algebraic interpretations [BS00,
BS03, SH, Sa, El02, El04], as well as physical applications [GST, DHW, CCM].
The entries m3(A1,A2) of the Tits-Freudenthal Magic Square can be defined equivalently
[BS03] using the Tits [Ti], Barton-Sudbery [BS03] (also cf. [Ev]), and Vinberg [Vin66] construc-
tions2,
m3(A1,A2) =

der(A1)⊕ der(J3(A2)) +̇ ImA1 ⊗ J′3(A2);
der(A1)⊕ der(A2) +̇ sa(3,A1 ⊗ A2);
tri(A1)⊕ tri(A2) +̇ 3(A1 ⊗ A2),
(1)
where A1 and A2 are normed Hurwitz division algebras R,C,H,O or the split counterparts
Cs,Hs,Os. Here, J3(A) denotes the Jordan algebra of 3 × 3 Hermitian matrices over A and
J′3(A) its subspace of traceless elements. The space of anti-Hermitian traceless n × n matrices
over A1 ⊗ A2 is denoted sa(n,A1 ⊗ A2). Details of the commutators and the isomorphisms
between these Lie algebras can be found e.g. in [BS03]. The choice of division or split A1,A2
yields different real forms : for the Tits construction, further possibilities are given by allowing
the Jordan algebra to be Lorentzian, denoted J2,1, as described in [CCM] (see Sec. 2.3 below);
equivalently, one can introduce overall signs in the definition of the commutators between distinct
components in the Vinberg or Barton-Sudbery constructions, as described in [ABDHN]. For a
complete listing of all possibilities3, see [CCM]. Recently [WDM], Wilson, Dray and Manogue
gave a new construction of the Lie algebra e8 in terms of 3 × 3 matrices such that the Lie
bracket has a natural description as matrix commutator; this led to a new interpretation of the
Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square of Lie algebras4, acting on themselves by commutation.
While Tits was more interested in algebraic aspects, Freudenthal interpreted every row of the
Magic Square in terms of a different kind of geometry, i.e. elliptic, projective, symplectic and
meta-symplectic for the first, second, third and fourth row, respectively [LM01]. This means
that, while the algebras taken in account were always the Hurwitz algebras R,C,H and O, all
Lie groups were arising from considering different type of transformations such as isometries,
collineations and homographies of the plane [Fr65]. On the other hand, Rosenfeld conceived
every entry of the 4 × 4 array of the Magic Square as the Lie algebra of the (global) isometry
group of a “generalized” projective plane, later called Rosenfeld plane [Ro98, Ro97]. Thus, while
in Freudenthal’s framework the projective plane was always the same but, depending on the
considered row of the Magic Square, the kind of transformations was changed; in Rosenfeld’s
picture the group of transformations was always the isometry group, and different Lie groups
appeared considering different planes over tensor product of Hurwitz algebras.
To be more precise, since the exceptional Lie group F4 is the isometry group of the octonionic
projective plane OP 2, then Rosenfeld regarded E6 as the isometry group of the bioctonionic “pro-
1Even though the original construction by Tits was not symmetric in the two entries (cf. the third of (1)),
the square turned out to be symmetric and was, therefore, dubbed as “magic”.
2The ternary algebra approach of [Ka] was generalised by Bars and Günaydin in [BG] to include super Lie
algebras. Generalizations to affine, hyperbolic and further extensions of Lie algebras have been considered in
[Pa].
3Concerning the extension of Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square to various types of “intermediate” algebras, the
extension to the sextonions S (between H and O) is due to Westbury [Wes], and later developed by Landsberg
and Manivel [LM01, LM06], whereas further extension to the tritonions T (between C and H) was discussed by
Borsten and one of the present authors in [BM].
4Magic Squares of order 2 of Lie groups have been investigated in [DHK]. Interestingly, the Freudenthal-Tits
Magic Square of Lie groups was observed to be non-symmetric since [Yo85].
3
jective” plane (C⊗ O)P 2, E7 as the isometry group of the quaternoctonionic “projective” plane
(H⊗ O)P 2, and E8 as the isometry group of the octooctonionic “projective” plane (O⊗ O)P 2.
Despite Rosenfeld’s suggestive interpretation, it was soon realized that the planes identified by
Rosenfeld did not satisfy projective axioms, and this explains the quotes in the term “projec-
tive”, which would have to be intended only in a vague sense. It was the work of Atsuyama,
followed by Landsberg and Manivel, to give a rigorous description of the geometry arising from
Rosenfeld’s approach [Atsu2, LM01, AB]. Indeed (unlike O ' R⊗ O) C⊗ O, H⊗ O and O⊗ O
are not division algebras, thus preventing a direct projective construction; moreover (unlike
C⊗ O), Hermitian 3× 3 matrices over H⊗ O or O⊗ O do not form a simple Jordan algebra, so
the usual identification of points (lines) with trace 1 (2) projection operators cannot be made
[Ba]. Nonetheless, they are in fact geometric spaces, generalising projective spaces, known as
“buildings”, on which (the various real forms of) exceptional Lie groups act as isometries. Build-
ings where originally introduced by Tits in order to provide a geometric approach to simple Lie
groups, in particular the exceptional cases, but have since had far reaching implications; see, for
instance, [Ti2, Te] and Refs. therein.
More specifically, Rosenfeld noticed that, over R, the isometry group of the octonionic pro-
jective plane was the compact form of F4, i.e. F4(−52), while the other, non-compact real forms,
i.e. the split form F4(4) and F4(−20), were obtained as isometry groups of the split-octonionic
projective plane OsP 2 and of the octonionic hyperbolic plane OH2 [CMCAb, CMCAa], respec-
tively. Thence, he proceeded in relating all real forms of exceptional Lie groups with projective
and hyperbolic planes over tensorial products of Hurwitz algebras [Ro97, Ro98].
Despite being very insightful, to the best of our knowledge Rosenfeld’s approach was never
formulated in a systematic way, and a large part of the very Rosenfeld planes were never really
rigorously defined. In the present investigation, we give a systematic and explicit definition
of all octonionic5 “Rosenfeld planes” as coset manifolds, by exploiting all real forms of Magic
Squares of order 3 over Hurwitz algebras and their split versions, thus all possible real forms
of Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square. In doing so, we will also find a total of 10 coset manifolds,
namely 7 “planes” and 3 “lines”, whose definition is straightforward according to our procedure,
but that apparently do not have any interpretation according to Rosenfeld’s approach.
The plan of the paper is as follows. In Sec. 2 we will resume all the algebraic machinery
used in this paper, i.e. Hurwitz algebras, their triality and derivation symmetries, Euclidean
and Lorentzian cubic Jordan algebras, Magic Squares of order 3 and 2, etc. In Sec. 3 we will
then present the “magic” formulæ which we will use in order to define the octonionic Rosenfeld
planes in Sec. 4; then, we will do the same for octonionic Rosenfled lines in Secs. 5 and 6. Some
final remarks and an outlook are given in Sec. 7.
2 Real forms of Magic Squares of order 3 and 2
2.1 Hurwitz algebras and their split versions
Let the octonions O be the only unital, non-associative, normed division algebra with R8 de-
composition of x ∈ O given by
x =
7∑
k=0
xkik,
(2)
where {i0 = 1, i1, ..., i7} is a basis of R8 and the multiplication rules are mnemonically encoded
in the Fano plane (see left side of Fig. 1), along with i2k = −1 for k = 1, ..., 7. Let the norm
5The quaternionic, complex and real “Rosenfeld planes” and “Rosenfeld lines” can be obtained as proper
sub-manifolds of their octonionic counterparts, so we will here focus only on the latter ones.
4
Figure 1: Multiplication rule of octonions O (left) and of split-octonions Os (right) as real
vector space R8 in the basis {i0 = 1, i1, ..., i7}. In the case of the octonions i20 = 1 and i2k = −1
for k = 1...7, while in the case of split-octonions i2k = +1, for k = 1, 2, 3 and i
2
k = −1 for
k
6= 1, 2, 3.
N (x) be defined as
N (x) :=
7∑
k=0
(xkik)
2
,
(3)
and its polarisation as 〈x, y〉 := N (x+ y)−N (x)−N (y) . Then the real part of x is R (x) :=
〈x, 1〉 and x := 2 〈x, 1〉 − x. We then have that N (x) = xx, 〈x, y〉 = xy + yx,and that
N (xy) = N (x)N (y) ,
(4)
or, in other words, that octonions are a composition algebra with respect to the Norm N defined
by (3).
We now define as the algebra of quaternions H as the subalgebra of O generated by the
elements {i0 = 1, i1, i2, i3} and the algebra of complex numbers C as the subalgebra of O generated
by the elements {i0 = 1, i1}.
Thus, the split-octonions Os can be defined as the only unital, non-associative, normed
algebra with R8 decomposition of x ∈ Os given by (2) where, again, {i0 = 1, i1, ..., i7} is a basis
of R8, but the multiplication rules are encoded in a different variant of the Fano plane, given
by the right side of Fig. 1, along with i2k = 1 for k = 1, ..., 3 and i
2
k = −1 for k = 4, 5, 6, 7 .
Norm and conjugation are defined as in the octonionic case and, as for the division octonions,
we obtain that split octonions are a composition algebra with respect to the Norm N defined
by (3). We then define the algebra of split-quaternions Hs as the subalgebra of Os generated by
{i0 = 1, i1, i4, i5} and the split-complex (or hypercomplex ) numbers Cs as the subalgebra of Os
generated by {i0 = 1, i4}.
2.2 Trialities and derivations
Let A be an algebra and End (A) the associative algebra of its linear endomorphisms. Then, the
triality algebra tri (A) is the Lie subalgebra of so (A)⊕ so (A)⊕ so (A) defined as
tri (A) :=
{
(A,B,C) ∈ End (A)⊕3 : A (xy) = B (x) y + xC (y) ,∀x, y ∈ A
}
,
(5)
where the Lie bracket are those inherited as a subalgebra. Derivations are a special case of
trialities of the form (A,A,A) and therefore they again form a Lie algebra, defined as
der (A) := {A ∈ End (A) : A (xy) = A (x) y + xA (y) ,∀x, y ∈ A} ,
(6)
5
R
C
H
O
tri (A) Ø
u (1)⊕ u (1)
so (3)⊕ so (3)⊕ so (3)
so (8)
tri (As) Ø
so (1, 1)⊕ so (1, 1)
sl2 (R)⊕ sl2 (R)⊕ sl2 (R)
so (4, 4)
der (A) Ø
Ø
so (3)
g2(−14)
der (As) Ø
Ø
sl2 (R)
g2(2)
A (A) Ø
u1
su2
Ø
A (As) Ø
so1,1
sl2 (R)
Ø
Table 1: Triality and derivation algebras of Hurwitz algebras. Moreover we also added the
algebra A (A) := tri (A) so (A) , that will be used in Sec. 3.2 in the definition of the Rosenfeld
planes.
where the bracket is given by the commutator. In the case of A = C,H,O we intended so (A)
as so (2), so (4) and so (8) respectively; while, for their split companions, we intended so (As) as
so (1, 1), so (2, 2) and so (4, 4). Triality and derivation Lie algebras over Hurwitz algebras are
summarized in Table 1.
2.3 Euclidean and Lorentzian simple rank-3 Jordan algebras
Let A be a composition algebra and Hn (A) be the set of Hermitian n×n matrices with elements
in A such that
X† := X
t
= X,
(7)
where the conjugation is the one pertaining to A itself. When6 n = 2 or 3, we define the simple,
rank-n Euclidean Jordan algebra Jn (A) as the commutative algebra over Hn (A) with the Jordan
product ◦ defined by the anticommutator
X ◦ Y := 1
2
(XY + Y X) =: {X,Y } , ∀X,Y ∈ Hn (A) ,
(8)
where juxtaposition denotes the standard ’rows-by-columns’ matrix product. Moreover, we
define J′n (A) as the subspace of the Jordan algebra orthogonal to the identity I (namely, the
subspace of traceless matrices in Jn (A)), endowed with the product inherited7 from Jn (A) (see
e.g. [BS03, p.8]). In particular, for n = 3 the simple, rank-3 Euclidean Jordan algebra J3 (A)
has elements
X :=
 a x1 x2
x1
b
x3
x2 x3
c
 ∈ J3 (A) ,
(9)
where x1, x2, x3 ∈ A and a, b, c ∈ R.
The Hermiticity condition (7) can be generalized by inserting a pseudo-Euclidean metric :
ηX†η = X,
(10)
η := diag
−1, ...,−1
︸
︷︷
︸
p times
, 1, ..., 1
︸ ︷︷ ︸
n−p times
 .
(11)
Correspondingly, one defines the simple, rank-n pseudo-Euclidean Jordan algebra Jn−p,p (A) '
Jp,n−p (A).
In particular, by setting n = 3, the simple, rank-3 Lorentzian Jordan algebra
6Excluding A = O and Os, one can actually consider any n ∈ N.
7Note that J′n (A) is not closed under the restriction of the Jordan product ◦ of Jn (A) to J′n (A) itself. However,
one can deform ◦ into the Michel-Radicati product ∗, defined as X ∗ Y := X ◦ Y − Tr(X◦Y )
n
I ∀X,Y ∈ J′n (A),
under which J′n (A) is closed [MR70, MR73].
6
J2,1 (A) ' J1,2 (A), whose elements read as
X :=
 a
x1 x2
−x1
b
x3
−x2 x3
c
 ∈ J1,2 (A) ,
(12)
where x1, x2, x3 ∈ A and a, b, c ∈ R.
2.4 Real forms of the Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square
As anticipated in (1), given A1 and A2 two composition algebras, the corresponding entry of
Tits-Freudenthal Magic Square m3 (A1,A2) is a Lie algebra that can be realized in at least three
different, but equivalent ways, on which we will now briefly comment (without the explicit
definition of the Lie brackets, that can be found e.g. in [BS03]).
1. Tits construction [Ti] is given by the first line of the r.h.s. of (1) :
m3 (A1,A2) := der(A1)⊕ der(J3(A2)) +̇ ImA1 ⊗ J′3(A2),
(13)
thus involving the derivation Lie algebra of A1 and the derivation Lie algebra of the simple,
rank-3 Euclidean Jordan algebra J3 (A2) over A2. Tits construction, despite being not
manifestly symmetric under the exchange A1 ↔ A2, is the most general of the three
constructions presented here, since it holds for any alternative algebras A1 and A2, as
long as it is possible to define a Jordan algebra over A2 itself. As mentioned above, Tits
construction can be generalized to J2,1(A2), thus yielding8 m1,2 (A1,A2).
2. A more symmetric approach was pursued by Vinberg [Vin66], who obtained the formula
given by the second line of the r.h.s. of (1),
m3 (A1,A2) = der(A1)⊕ der(A2) +̇ sa(3,A1 ⊗ A2).
(14)
This formula is manifestly symmetric under the exchange A1 ↔ A2, but it only holds if
A1 and A2 are both composition algebras; it involves only the derivation Lie algebras of A
and B, as well as the 3 × 3 antisymmetric matrices over A1 ⊗ A2. As mentioned above, a
suitable deformation of (14) is possible, in order to give rise to m1,2 (A1,A2).
3. Another symmetric formula under the exchange A1 ↔ A2 was obtained by Barton and
Sudbery [BS03] (also cf. [Ev]), and it is given by the third line of the r.h.s. of (1),
m3 (A1,A2) = tri(A1)⊕ tri(A2) +̇ 3(A1 ⊗ A2),
(15)
involving the triality algebras tri (A1) and tri (A2), together with three copies of the tensor
product A1⊗A2. Again, as mentioned above, a suitable deformation of (15) is possible, in
order to give rise to m1,2 (A1,A2).
Other, different versions of the construction of Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square have been devel-
oped by Santander and Herranz [SH, Sa], Atsuyama [Ats, Atsu2] and Elduque [El04, El02, El18],
all involving composition algebras (even though Elduque’s construction involves flexible compo-
sition algebras instead of alternative composition algebras [El18]).
8Since J2,1(A2) ' J1,2(A2), it holds that m2,1(A1,A2) ' m1,2(A1,A2).
7
2.5 Magic Square of order 2
Inspired by the works of Freudenthal and Tits, Barton and Sudbery [BS03] also considered a
different Magic Square, based on 2× 2 matrices, and defined by the following formula :
m2 (A1,A2) := so (A
′
1)⊕ der (J2 (A2))⊕ (A′1 ⊗ J′2 (A2)) ,
(16)
which also enjoys a “Vinberg-like” equivalent version as
m2 (A1,A2) = so (A
′
1)⊕ so (A′2)⊕ sa2 (A1 ⊗ A2) ,
(17)
that was more recentely used at Lie group level in [DHK]. Formula (16) can be generalized to
involve simple, rank-2 Lorentzian Jordan algebras J1,1 (A2) (see Sec. 2.3), thus obtaining the
Lorentzian version of the Magic Square of order 2,
m1,1 (A1,A2) := so (A
′
1)⊕ der (J1,1 (A2))⊕
(
A′1 ⊗ J′1,1 (A2)
)
,
(18)
which we will explicitly evaluate in the treatment below (for the first time in literature, to the
best of our knowledge).
2.6 Octonionic entries of Magic Squares of order 2 and 3
In order to rigorously define all possible octonionic “Rosenfeld planes” and “Rosenfeld lines”
over R (i.e. all possible real forms thereof), we need to isolate all octonionic and split-octonionic
entries of all real forms of the Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square (order 3) [CCM, BM, ABDHN,
BS03] and of the Magic Square of order 2 [BS03], i.e. we need to consider the entries mα (A1,A2)
in which at least one of A1 and A2 is O or Os, for all possible real forms, namely for α = 3
(Euclidean order 3), 1, 2 (Lorentzian order 3), 2 (Euclidean order 2) and 1, 1 (Lorentzian order
2).
The octonionic entries of the Euclidean Magic Squares of order 3 m3 (i.e., of all Euclidean
real forms of Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square) are
A m3 (A,O) m3 (As,O) m3 (Os,A) m3 (As,Os)
R
f4(−52)
f4(−52)
f4(4)
f4(4)
C
e6(−78)
e6(−26)
e6(2)
e6(6)
H
e7(−133)
e7(−25)
e7(−5)
e7(7)
O
e8(−248)
e8(−24)
e8(−24)
e8(8)
The entries of the table above comprise all real forms of e8 and e7, and most of the real
forms of e6 and f4. The missing real forms f4(−20) and e6(−14) can be recovered as the octonionic
entries of the Lorentzian Magic Squares of order 3 m2,1 (i.e., of all Lorentzian real forms of
Freudenthal-Tits Magic Square), given by
A m1,2 (A,O) m1,2 (As,O) m1,2 (Os,A) m1,2 (As,Os)
R
f4(−20)
f4(−20)
f4(4)
f4(4)
C
e6(−14)
e6(−26)
e6(2)
e6(6)
H
e7(−5)
e7(−25)
e7(−5)
e7(7)
O
e8(8)
e8(−24)
e8(−24)
e8(8)
On the other hand, the octonionic entries of the Euclidean Magic Squares of order 2 m2 are9
9The explicit form of m2 (As,Bs) is, as far as we know, not present in the current literature. We will present
a detailed treatment elsewhere, and here we confine ourselves to report its octonionic column only.
8
A m2 (A,O) m2 (As,O) m2 (Os,A) m2 (As,Os)
R
so (9)
so (9)
so (5, 4)
so (5, 4)
C
so (10)
so (9, 1)
so (6, 4)
so (5, 5)
H
so (12)
so (10, 2)
so (8, 4)
so (6, 6)
O
so (16)
so (12, 4)
so (12, 4)
so (8, 8)
Finally, the octonionic entries of the Lorentzian Magic Squares of order 2 m1,1 are given by10
A m1,1 (A,O) m1,1 (As,O) m1,1 (Os,A) m1,1 (As,Os)
R
so (8, 1)
so (8, 1)
so (5, 4)
so (5, 4)
C
so (8, 2)
so (9, 1)
so (6, 4)
so (5, 5)
H
so (8, 4)
so (10, 2)
so (8, 4)
so (6, 6)
O
so (8, 8)
so (12, 4)
so (12, 4)
so (8, 8)
3
“Magic” formulæ for Rosenfeld planes
In his study of the geometry of Lie groups [Ro97], Rosenfeld defined its “projective” planes
(A⊗ B)P 2 as the completion of some affine planes obtained as non-associative modules over the
tensor algebra A ⊗ B. He then argued the form of the matrices composing the linear transfor-
mations associated with the Lie algebra of the collineations that preserved the polarity, i.e. the
isometries of the plane. This approach allowed him to relate all real forms of exceptional Lie
groups [Ro93, Ro98] with isometries of suitable “projective” hyperbolic spaces. As mentioned
above, unfortunately the procedure carried out by Rosenfeld was not rigorous, since many of
theorems used in [Ro97] do not extend to the case of algebras that are not alternative nor of
composition, as it is in the case of many algebras listed in Table 2.
We present here a general and rigorous way to define the spaces considered by Rosenfeld, in
terms of their isometry and isotropy groups, namely using the theory of coset manifolds.
3.1 Coset manifolds
Since our “magic” formulæ define all Rosenfeld planes as coset manifolds, it is worth briefly
reviewing them, and their relation to homogenous spaces. An homogeneous space is a manifold
on which a Lie group acts transitively, i.e. a manifold on which is defined an action ρg from
G ×M in M such that ρe (m) = m for e the identity in G and m ∈ M and for which, given
any m,n ∈ M it exists a a not necessarely unique g ∈ G such that ρg (m) = n. Within this
framework, the isotropy group Isotm (G) is the set formed by the elements of G that fix the
point m ∈M under the action of G, i.e.
Isotm (G) = {g ∈ G : ρg (m) = m} .
(19)
Since, by definition of group action, we have that ρe (m) = m and ρgh (m) = ρg (ρh (m)), then
K = Isotm (G) is a closed subgroup of G and, moreover the natural map from the quotient space
G/K in M given by gK
7→ gm is a diffeomorphism (see [Ar] and Refs. therein).
Given a Lie groupG and a closed subgroupK < G, then the coset spaceG/K = {gK : g ∈ G}
is endowed with a natural manifold structure inherited by G and is, therefore, called a coset
manifold. Notice that the action of G on the coset manifold G/K, given by the translation τg
defined as
τg (m) = gm,
(20)
10The Lorentzian magic square of order two yield to three algebras, i.e. so (8, 1), so (8, 2) and so (8, 4) which
are not covered in other magic squares. The explicit forms of m1,1 (A,B), m1,1 (As,B) and m1,1 (As,Bs) are, as
far as we know, not present in the current literature. We will present a detailed treatment elsewhere, and here
we confine ourselves to report their octonionic rows and columns only.
9
Algebra Comm. Ass. Alter.
Flex. Pow. Ass.
C⊗ C
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
C⊗ H
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
H⊗ H
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
C⊗ O
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
H⊗ O
No
No
No
No
No
O⊗ O
No
No
No
No
No
Table 2: Properties of the algebra A ⊗ B where A,B are Hurwitz algebras. As for the property
an algebra A is said to be commutative if xy = yx for every x, y ∈ X; it is defined as associative
if satisfies x (yz) = (xy) z; alternative if x (yx) = (xy)x; flexible if x (yy) = (xy) y and, finally,
power-associative if x (xx) = (xx)x.
for every g ∈ G andm ∈ G/K, is transitive, i.e. for everym,n ∈ G/K it exists a (not necessarily
unique) g ∈ G such that n = gm, and thus the coset manifold G/K is an homogenous space. On
the other hand, since multiple groups can act transitively on the same manifold with different
isotropy groups, then an homogeneous space can be realised in multiple way as a coset manifold.
Moreover, a close look to the definitions shows that the isotropy group Isotm (G/K) is exactly
the closed subgroup K.11 In general, the holonomy subgroup and the isotropy subgroup have
the same identity-connected component; so, if one assumes that G/K is simply-connected, they
are equal (see e.g. [Be, He] and Refs. therein).
Moreover, let G be a Lie group and K a closed and connected subgroup of G, denoting with
g and k their respective Lie algebras, then the coset manifold G/K is reductive if there exists a
subspace m such that g = k⊕m and {
[k, k] ⊂ k,
[k,m] ⊂ m,
(21)
while if in addition to (21) we also have
[m,m] ⊂ k,
(22)
then the space is symmetric. All Rosenfeld planes are symmetric coset manifolds.
It is also worth noting that for any coset manifold G/K the structure constants of the Lie
algebra g of the Lie group G define completely the structure constants of the manifold, thus the
invariant metrics, and all the metric-dependent tensors, such as the curvature tensor, the Ricci
tensor, etc. Indeed, let {E1, ..., En} be a basis for g in such a way that {E1, ..., Em} are a basis
for k, which we will also call {K1, ...,Km} for readibility reasons, and {Em+1, ..., En} a basis
for m that we will also denote as {Mm+1, ...,Mn}. Then consider the structure constants of the
algebra g, i.e.
[Ej , Ek] =
n∑
i=1
CijkEi,
(23)
for every j, k ∈ {1, ..., n}. Conditions for reductivity in (21) are then translated in

[Kj ,Kk] =
m∑
i=1
CijkKi
for j, k ∈ {1, ...,m} ,
[Kj ,Mk] =
n∑
i=m+1
CijkMi
for j ∈ {1, ...,m} , k ∈ {m+ 1, ..., n} ,
(24)
11In particular, the origin of G/K is, by definition, the point at which theK-invariance is immediately manifest.
10
while, on the other hand, from
[Mj ,Mk] =
m∑
i=1
CijkKi+
n∑
i=m+1
CijkMi,
(25)
we deduce that if Cijk = 0 for all i, j, k ∈ {m+ 1, ..., n}, we have also a symmetric space. From
the structure constants Cijk, all geometrical invariants of the coset manifold can be obtained
(see [FF17] for all technical details) such as the Riemann tensor over the coset manifold G/K
which is given by
Rabcd =
n∑
e=m+1
1
λ2
(
1
8
CaedC
e
bc −
1
8λ
CabeC
e
cd − CaecCebd
)
− 1
2λ2
m∑
i=1
CabiC
i
cd,
(26)
and that, in case of symmetric spaces, i.e. when Cijk = 0 for i, j, k ∈ {m+ 1, ..., n}, reduces
drastically to
Rabcd = −
1
2λ2
m∑
i=1
CabiC
i
cd,
(27)
for every a, b, c, d ∈ {m+ 1, ..., n}.
In fact, what is relevant for our purposes is that the Lie group G, which acts as isometry
group, and its closed subgroup K, which acts as isotropy group, define completely all the metric
properties and geometric invariants of the Rosenfeld planes. On the other hand, instead of
working on Lie groups G andK, i.e. with the isometry group and the isotropy group respectively,
in the following sections we will work with their respective Lie algebras g and k, in order to recover
the appropriate G and K and thus define the Rosenfeld plane.
3.2
“Magic” formulæ
As seen in the previous section, the geometry of a coset manifold is fully determined by the
(global) isotropy Lie group G and by its (local) subgroup given by the isotropy Lie group K.
We now characterize the Rosenfeld “projective” planes by specifying the real form of the Lie
groups that will act as isometry and isotropy groups, while the Lie brackets - and therefore the
metrical properties of the space - are those arising from Tits construction. It is here worth noting
that the classification of the real forms of simple Lie groups makes use of the character χ, defined
as the difference of the cardinality of non-compact and compact generators, i.e. χ := #nc−#c;
consequently, Rosenfeld planes will have a corresponding χ.
Let A and B be two Hurwitz algebras, in their division or split versions. Moreover, let the
Lie group A (A) be such that its Lie algebra is Lie(A (A)) ≡ A(A) := tri (A) so (A), cfr. Table 1.
Moreover, letMα (A,B) be the Lie group with Lie algebra given by the (A,B)-entry of the Magic
Square mα (A,B), namely12 Lie(Mα (A,B)) = mα (A,B). In order to characterize “projective”
Rosenfeld planes over tensor products of Hurwitz algebras in terms of coset manifolds with
isometry (resp. isotropy) Lie groups whose Lie algebras are entries of real forms of the Magic
Square of order 3 (resp. 2), we now introduce the following three different classes of locally
symmetric, (pseudo-)Riemannian coset manifolds, that we name as Rosenfeld planes :
1. The projective Rosenfeld plane
(A⊗ B)P 2 '
M3 (A,B)
M2 (A,B)⊗A (A)⊗A (B)
.
(28)
12For the pseudo-orthogonal Lie algebras, we will generally consider the spin covering of the corresponding Lie
group.
11
2. The hyperbolic Rosenfeld plane
(A⊗ B)H2 '
M1,2 (A,B)
M2 (A,B)⊗A (A)⊗A (B)
.
(29)
3. The pseudo-Rosenfeld plane
(A⊗ B) H̃2 '
M1,2 (A,B)
M1,1 (A,B)⊗A (A)⊗A (B)
.
(30)
Eqs. (28), (29) and (30) are named “magic” formulæ, since they characterize the Rosenfeld
planes as homogeneous (symmetric) manifolds, with isometry (resp.
isotropy) groups whose
Lie algebras are given by the entries of some real forms of the Magic Square of order 3 (resp.
2), with further isotropy factors given by the Lie groups A associated to the algebras A and B
defining the tensor product associated to the class of Rosenfeld plane under consideration. As
previously noticed, the term “projective” and “hyperbolic” are here to be intended in a vague
sense since none of the octonionic Rosenfeld planes with dimension greater than 16 satisfy axioms
of projective or hyperbolic geometry. Nevertheless, those adjectives are not arbitrary since the
notion of such projective planes can be made precise as in [Atsu2, AB] and it then agrees with
the above definitions.
4 Octonionic Rosenfeld planes
We now consider the “magic” formulæ (28)-(30) in the cases13 in which A and/or B is O or
Os : this will allow us to rigorously introduce the octonionic Rosenfeld planes, which all share
the fact that their isometry group is a real form of an exceptional Lie group of F- or E- type;
however, it is here worth anticipating that a few real forms of Rosenfeld planes with exceptional
isometry groups cannot be characterized in this way.
4.1 O ' R⊗ O
The simplest case concerns the tensor product R ⊗ O, which is nothing but O : in fact, this
was the original observation by Rosenfeld that started it all, yielding to the usual octonionic
projective, split-octonionic and hyperbolic plane, i.e. OP 2, OH2 and OsP 2, respectively. Within
the framework introduced above, the starting point is given by the Cayley-Moufang plane over
C, namely by the octonionic projective plane over C, i.e. by the locally symmetric coset manifold
having as isometry group the complex form of F4, and as isotropy group Spin (9,C), i.e.
OP 2C '
FC4
Spin (9,C)
.
(31)
In this coset space formulation, the tangent space of OP 2C can be identified with the 16C-
dimensional spinor representation space of the isotropy group Spin (9,C).
Then, by specifying the formulæ (28), (29) and (30) for A = R and B = O or Os, we obtain
all real forms14 of (31) as Rosenfeld planes over R ⊗ O ' O or over R ⊗ Os ' Os; they are
summarized by the following15 Table [CMCAb] :
13As mentioned above, this restriction does not imply any loss of generality, as far as the other, non-octonionic
Rosenfeld planes can be obtained as suitable sub-manifolds of the octonionic Rosenfeld planes.
14By real forms of OP 2C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact and non-
compact) forms of F4, and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms of Spin(9)
which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of F4.
15Recall that A(R) = A(O) = A(Os) = ∅.
12
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy #nc #c
χ
OP 2
F4(−52)
Spin (9)
0
16 −16
OH2
F4(−20)
Spin (9)
16
0
16
OH̃2
F4(−20)
Spin (8, 1)
8
8
0
OsP 2
F4(4)
Spin (5, 4)
8
8
0
along with
OsP
2 ' OsH2 ' OsH̃2.
(32)
4.2 C⊗ O
In the bioctonionic case, i.e. for C⊗O, the starting point is given by the bioctonionic projective
plane over C, i.e. by the locally symmetric coset manifold having as isometry group the complex
form of E6, and as isotropy group Spin(10,C)⊗U1, i.e.
(C⊗ O)P 2C '
EC6
Spin (10,C)⊗ (U1)C
,
(33)
which is a Kähler manifold, and has been recently treated in [CMCAa].
In this case, the
tangent space of the coset manifold (33) is the
(
16C,+ ⊕ 16C,−
)
representation of the isotropy
group Spin (10,C)⊗U1.
Then, by specifying the formulæ (28), (29) and (30) for A = C or Cs and B = O or Os, we ob-
tain all real forms16 of (33) which can be expressed as Rosenfeld planes over C(or Cs)⊗O(or Os);
they are summarized by the following17 Table :
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy
#nc #c
χ
(C⊗ O)P 2
E6(−78)
Spin (10)⊗U1
0
32 −32
(C⊗ O)H2
E6(−14)
Spin (10)⊗U1
32
0
32
(C⊗ O)H̃2
E6(−14)
Spin (8, 2)⊗U1
16
16
0
(C⊗ Os)P 2
E6(2)
Spin (6, 4)⊗U1
16
16
0
(Cs⊗O)P 2
E6(−26)
Spin (9, 1)⊗ SO (1, 1)
16
16
0
(Cs⊗Os)P 2
E6(6)
Spin (5, 5)⊗ SO (1, 1)
16
16
0
along with
(C⊗ Os)P 2 ' (C⊗ Os)H2 ' (C⊗ Os) H̃2,
(34)
(Cs⊗O)P 2 ' (Cs⊗O)H2 ' (Cs⊗O) H̃2,
(35)
(Cs⊗Os)P 2 ' (Cs⊗Os)H2 ' (Cs⊗Os) H̃2,
(36)
expressing the fact that projective, hyperbolic and pseudo Rosenfeld planes involving Cs and/or
Os are all isomorphic.
The first four manifolds of the above Table, having a U1 factor in the isotropy group, are
Kähler manifolds, whereas the last two, having a SO(1, 1) factor in the isotropy group, are
pseudo-Kähler manifolds.
16By real forms of (C⊗ O)P 2C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact
and non-compact) forms of E6, and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms of
Spin(10,C)⊗ (U1)C which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of E6.
17Recall that A(C) = u1, and A(Cs) = so1,1.
13
Finally, and more importantly, there are two real forms of (33), namely the locally symmetric,
pseudo-Riemannian coset Kähler manifolds
X32,I
:=
E6(2)
SO∗(10)⊗U1
, #nc = 20,#c = 12⇒ χ = 8;
(37)
X32,II
:=
E6(−14)
SO∗(10)⊗U1
, #nc = 12,#c = 20⇒ χ = −8,
(38)
whose isotropy Lie group has the corresponding Lie algebra which is not an entry of any real
form of the Magic Square of order 2.
In other words, since the Lie algebra so∗(10) does not occur in any real form of the Magic
Square of order 2 (see Secs. 2.5 and 2.6), the symmetric Kähler manifolds (37) and (38) cannot
be characterized as Rosenfeld planes over C(or Cs)⊗O(or Os).
4.3 H⊗ O
In the quaternoctonionic case, i.e. for H⊗O, the starting point is given by the quaternoctonionic
“projective” plane over C, i.e. by the locally symmetric coset manifold having as isometry group
the complex form of E7, and as isotropy group Spin(12,C)⊗ SL (2,C), i.e.
(H⊗ O)P 2C '
EC7
Spin (12,C)⊗ SL (2,C)
,
(39)
which is a quaternionic Kähler manifold, and whose tangent space is given by the
(
32(′),2
)
C
representation18 of the isotropy group Spin (12,C)⊗ SL (2,C).
Then, by specifying the formulæ (28), (29) and (30) for A = H or Hs and B = O or Os, we ob-
tain all real forms19 of (39) which can be expressed as Rosenfeld planes over H(or Hs)⊗O(or Os);
they are summarized by the following20 Table :
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy
#nc #c
χ
(H⊗ O)P 2
E7(−133)
Spin (12)⊗ SU (2)
0
64 −64
(H⊗ O)H2
E7(−5)
Spin (12)⊗ SU (2)
64
0
64
(H⊗ O)H̃2
E7(−5)
Spin (8, 4)⊗ SU (2)
32
32
0
(Hs⊗O)P 2
E7(−25)
Spin (10, 2)⊗ SL (2,R)
32
32
0
(Hs⊗Os)P 2
E7(7)
Spin (6, 6)⊗ SL (2,R)
32
32
0
along with
(H⊗ O)H̃2 ' (H⊗ Os)P 2 ' (H⊗ Os)H2 ' (H⊗Os) H̃2,
(40)
(Hs⊗O)P 2 ∼= (Hs⊗O)H2 ∼= (Hs⊗O) H̃2,
(41)
(Hs⊗Os)P 2 ∼= (Hs⊗Os)H2 ∼= (Hs⊗Os) H̃2.
(42)
The planes that do not involve split algebras, namely the ones having a SU(2) factor in the
isotropy group, are quaternionic Kähler manifolds, whereas all the ones involving split algebras,
namely the ones having a SL(2,R) factor in the istropy group, are para-quaternionic Kähler
manifolds.
18For the possible priming of the semispinor 32 of Spin(12), see e.g. [Min].
19By real forms of (H⊗ O)P 2C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact
and non-compact) forms of E7, and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms of
Spin(12,C)⊗ SL2 (C) which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of E7.
20Recall that A(H) = su2, and A(Hs) = sl2(R).
14
Again, there are three real forms of (39), namely the locally symmetric, pseudo-Riemannian
(para-)quaternionic coset manifolds
X64,I
:=
E7(7)
SO∗ (12)⊗ SU (2)
, #nc = 40,#c = 24⇒ χ = 16;
(43)
X64,II
:=
E7(−5)
SO∗ (12)⊗ SL (2,R)
, #nc = 32,#c = 32⇒ χ = 0;
(44)
X64,III
:=
E7(−25)
SO∗ (12)⊗ SU (2)
, #nc = 24,#c = 40⇒ χ = −16,
(45)
whose isotropy Lie group -up to the factor SU(2) or SL(2,R)- has the corresponding Lie algebra
which is not an entry of any real form of the Magic Square of order 2.
In other words, since the Lie algebra so∗(12) does not occur in any real form of the Magic
Square of order 2 (see Secs. 2.5 and 2.6), the symmetric (para-)quaternionic Kähler manifolds
(43)-(45) cannot be characterized as Rosenfeld planes over H(or Hs)⊗O(or Os). It should however
be noticed that the isotropy group of (43)-(45) admits an interpretation in terms of real forms
of the Magic Square of order 3, namely
X64,I '
M3 (Hs,Os)
M3 (Hs,H)⊗A(H)
,
(46)
X64,II '
M3 (H,Os)
M3 (H,Hs)⊗A(Hs)
,
(47)
X64,III '
M3 (Hs,O)
M3 (Hs,H)⊗A(H)
,
(48)
but still the rationale (if any) of such formulæ is missing, and it is surely not the one underlying
the “magic” formulæ (28)-(30).
4.4 O⊗ O
In the octooctonionic case, i.e. for O ⊗ O, the starting point is given by the octoooctonionic
“projective” plane over C, i.e. by the locally symmetric coset manifold having as isometry group
the complex form of E8, and as isotropy group Spin(16,C), i.e.
(O⊗ O)P 2C '
EC8
Spin (16,C)
,
(49)
whose tangent space is given by the
(
128(′)
)
C
representation21 of Spin (16,C).
Then, by specifying the formulæ (28), (29) and (30) for A = O or Os and B = O or Os, we ob-
tain all real forms22 of (49) which can be expressed as Rosenfeld planes over O(or Os)⊗O(or Os);
they are summarized by the following Table :
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy #nc #c
χ
(O⊗ O)P 2
E8(−248)
Spin (16)
0
128 −128
(O⊗ O)H2
E8(8)
Spin (16)
128
0
128
(O⊗ O)H̃2
E8(8)
Spin (8, 8)
64
64
0
(Os⊗O)P 2
E8(−24)
Spin (12, 4)
64
64
0
21Again, for the possible priming of the semispinor 128 of Spin(16), see e.g. [Min].
22By real forms of (O⊗ O)P 2C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact
and non-compact) forms of E8, and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms of
Spin(16,C) which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of E8.
15
along with
(O⊗ O)H̃2 ' (Os⊗Os)P 2 ' (Os⊗Os)H2 ' (Os⊗Os) H̃2,
(50)
(O⊗ Os)P 2 ' (O⊗ Os)H2 ' (O⊗Os) H̃2.
(51)
Again, there are two real forms of (49), namely the locally symmetric, pseudo-Riemannian
coset manifolds
X128,I :=
E8(8)
SO∗ (16)
, #nc = 72,#c = 56⇒ χ = 16;
(52)
X128,II :=
E8(−24)
SO∗ (16)
, #nc = 56,#c = 72⇒ χ = −16,
(53)
whose isotropy Lie group has the corresponding Lie algebra which is not an entry of any real
form of the Magic Square of order 2.
In other words, since the Lie algebra so∗(16) does not occur in any real form of the Magic
Square of order 2 (see Secs. 2.5 and 2.6), the symmetric manifolds (52)-(53) cannot seemingly
be characterized as Rosenfeld planes over O(or Os)⊗O(or Os). It should however be noticed that
the isotropy group SO∗(16) of (52)-(53) admits an interpretation in terms of the Magic Square
of order 4, namely
X128,I '
M3 (Os,Os)
M4 (H,Hs)
;
(54)
X128,II '
M3 (O,Os)
M4 (H,Hs)
,
(55)
but still the rationale (if any) of such formulæ is missing, and it is surely not the one underlying
the “magic” formulæ (28)-(30).
5
“Magic” formulæ for Rosenfeld lines
Let Spin(A) the spin covering Lie group whose Lie algebra is Lie(Spin (A)) = so (A), namely
the Lie algebra which preserves the norm of the Hurwitz algebra A. In order to characterize
“projective” Rosenfeld lines over tensor products of Hurwitz algebras in terms of coset manifolds
with isometry and isotropy Lie groups whose Lie algebras respectively are entries of real forms of
the Magic Square of order 2 and norm-preserving Lie algebras of the involved Hurwitz algebras,
we now introduce a variation of (28) and (29), giving rise to the following two different classes
of locally symmetric, (pseudo-)Riemannian coset manifolds, that we name as Rosenfeld lines :
1. The “projective” Rosenfeld line
(A⊗ B)P 1 '
M2 (A,B)
Spin (A)⊗ Spin (B)
.
(56)
2. The hyperbolic Rosenfeld line
(A⊗ B)H2 ' M1,1 (A,B)
Spin (A)⊗ Spin (B)
.
(57)
Eqs. (56) and (57) are named “magic” formulæ, since they characterize the Rosenfeld lines as
homogeneous (symmetric) manifolds, with isometry and isotropy Lie groups respectively given
by the entries of some real forms of the Magic Square of order 2 and by norm-preserving Lie
algebras of the involved Hurwitz algebras.
16
Figure 2: Cartan classification, Satake diagram, character χ of exceptional Lie groups F4 and
E6 and related octonionic projective or hyperbolic Rosenfeld plane of which they are isometry
group.
17
Figure 3: Cartan classification, Satake diagram, character χ of exceptional Lie groups E7 and
E8 and related octonionic projective or hyperbolic Rosenfeld plane of which they are isometry
group.
18
6 Octonionic Rosenfeld lines
We now consider the “magic” formulæ (56)-(57) in the cases23 in which A and/or B is O or Os :
this will allow us to rigorously introduce the octonionic Rosenfeld lines; however, again, it is here
worth anticipating that a few real forms of octonionic Rosenfeld lines cannot be characterized
in this way.
6.1 O ' R⊗ O
Within the framework introduced above, the starting point is given by the octonionic projective
line over C, which is nothing but the 8-sphere S8C over C, i.e.
the locally symmetric coset
manifold having as isometry group Spin(9,C) and as isotropy group Spin (9,C) :
OP 1C '
Spin (9,C)
Spin (8,C)
.
(58)
In this coset space formulation, the tangent space of OP 1C can be identified with the 8(v,s,c),C
representation of Spin (8,C) where d4-triality [Por] allows to equivalently choose v, s, or c.
Then, by specifying the formulæ (56) and (57) for A = R and B = O or Os, we obtain all real
forms24 of (58) which can be expressed as Rosenfeld lines over R⊗ O ' O or over R⊗ Os ' Os;
they are summarized by the following Table :
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy #nc #c
χ
OP 1
Spin (9)
Spin (8)
0
8 −8
OH1
Spin (8, 1)
Spin (8)
8
0
8
OsP 1
Spin (5, 4)
Spin (4, 4)
4
4
0
along with OsH1 ' OsP 1.
It should then be remarked that the octonionic line OP 1 can be identified with the 8-sphere
S8 ≡ S8R over R, the hyperbolic line OH1 with the 8-hyperboloid H8 and the split-octonionic line
OsP 1 with the Kleinian 8-hyperboloidH4,4 (for some applications to physics and to non-compact
versions of Hopf maps, see e.g. [Ha]).
The real forms of OP 1C (58) have the general structures
Spin (p, 9− p)
Spin (p, 8− p)
structure I
or
Spin (p, 9− p)
Spin (p− 1, 9− p)
structure II
,
(59)
with p = 0, 1, ..., 9, which gets exchanged under p↔ 9− p.
OP 1, OH1 and OsP 1 ' OsH1 respectively correspond to structure I with p = 0, 8, 4 (or
structure II with p = 9, 1, 5).
All other real forms of OP 1C (58) cannot be characterized as Rosenfeld lines over O (or Os).
6.2 C⊗ O
In the bioctonionic case, i.e. for C⊗O, the starting point is given by the bioctonionic projective
line over C, i.e. by the locally symmetric coset manifold having as isometry group Spin (10,C)
with Spin (8,C)⊗U(1) as isotropy group :
(C⊗ O)P 1C '
Spin (10,C)
Spin (8,C)⊗ (U (1))C
.
(60)
23Also in this case, this restriction does not imply any loss of generality, as far as the other, non-octonionic
Rosenfeld lines can be obtained as suitable sub-manifolds of the octonionic Rosenfeld lines.
24By real forms of OP 1C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact and non-
compact) forms of Spin(9,C), and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms of
Spin(8,C) which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of Spin(9,C).
19
In this coset space formulation, the tangent space of (C⊗ O)P 1C can be identified with the
8(v,s,c),C+⊕ 8(v,s,c),C− representation of Spin (8,C)⊗ (U (1))C, where, as above, d4-triality [Por]
allows to equivalently choose v, s, or c.
Then, by specifying the formulæ (56) and (57) for A = C or Cs and B = O or Os, we obtain
all real forms25 of (60) which can be expressed as Rosenfeld lines over C(or Cs)⊗O(or Os); they
are summarized by the following Table :
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy
#nc #c
χ
(C⊗ O)P 1
Spin (10)
Spin (8)⊗U (1)
0
16 −16
(C⊗ O)H1
Spin (8, 2)
Spin (8)⊗U (1)
16
0
16
(C⊗ Os)P 1
Spin (6, 4)
Spin (4, 4)⊗U (1)
8
8
0
(Cs ⊗ O)P 1
Spin (9, 1)
Spin (8)⊗ SO (1, 1)
8
8
0
(Cs ⊗ Os)P 1
Spin (5, 5)
Spin (4, 4)⊗ SO (1, 1)
8
8
0
along with
(C⊗ Os)P 1 ' (C⊗ Os)H1;
(61)
(Cs⊗O)P 1 ' (Cs⊗O)H1;
(62)
(Cs⊗Os)P 1 ' (Cs⊗Os)H1.
(63)
The real forms of (C⊗ O)P 1C (60) have the general structures
Spin (p, 10− p;C)
Spin (p, 8− p;C)⊗ U1
structure I
or
Spin (p, 10− p;C)
Spin (p− 2, 10− p;C)⊗ U1
structure II
,
(64)
Spin (p, 10− p;C)
Spin (p− 1, 9− p;C)⊗ SO (1, 1)
structure III
,
(65)
Y16 :=
SO∗ (10)
SO∗ (8)⊗U (1)
'
SO∗ (10)
Spin (6, 2)⊗U (1)
,
(66)
with p = 0, 1, ..., 10, such that structures I and II get exchanged (while structure III is invari-
ant) under p↔ 10− p.
The planes (C⊗ O)P 1, (C⊗ O)H1, (C⊗ Os)P 1 respectively correspond to structure I with
p = 0, 8, 6 (or structure II with p = 10, 2, 4), whereas (Cs⊗O)P 1 and (Cs⊗Os)P 1 respectively
correspond to structure III with p = 9 (or p = 1) and p = 5. All other real forms of (C⊗ O)P 1C
(60), and in particular (66), cannot be characterized as Rosenfeld lines over C(or Cs)⊗O(or Os).
6.3 H⊗ O
In the quateroctonionic case, i.e. for H⊗ O, the starting point is given by the quateroctonionic
projective line over C, i.e. by the locally symmetric coset manifold having as isometry group
Spin (12,C) with Spin (8,C)⊗Spin(4,C) as isotropy group :
(H⊗ O)P 1C '
Spin (12,C)
Spin (8,C)⊗ Spin (4,C)
.
(67)
25By real forms of (C⊗ O)P 1C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact and
non-compact) forms of Spin(10,C), and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms
of Spin(8,C)⊗ (U (1))C which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of Spin(10,C).
20
In this coset space formulation, the tangent space of (H⊗ O)P 1C can be identified with the
(
8(v,s,c),2,2
)
representation of Spin(8,C)⊗Spin(4,C), where we used Spin(4,C) 'SL(2,C)⊗SL(2,C)
and, as above, d4-triality [Por] allows to equivalently choose v, s, or c.
Then, by specifying the formulæ (56) and (57) for A = H or Hs and B = O or Os, we obtain
all real forms26 of (67) which can be expressed as Rosenfeld lines over H(or Hs)⊗O(or Os); they
are summarized by the following Table :
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy
#nc #c
χ
(H⊗ O)P 1
Spin (12)
Spin (8)⊗ SU (2)⊗ SU (2)
0
32 −32
(H⊗ O)H1
Spin (8, 4)
Spin (8)⊗ SU (2)⊗ SU (2)
32
0
32
(H⊗ Os)P 1
Spin (8, 4)
Spin (4, 4)⊗ SU (2)⊗ SU (2)
16
16
0
(Hs ⊗ O)P 1
Spin (10, 2)
Spin (8)⊗ SL (2,R)⊗ SL (2,R)
16
16
0
(Hs ⊗ Os)P 1
Spin (6, 6)
Spin (4, 4)⊗ SL (2,R)⊗ SL (2,R)
16
16
0
along with
(H⊗ Os)P 1 ' (H⊗ Os)H1;
(68)
(Hs⊗O)P 1 ' (Hs⊗O)H1;
(69)
(Hs⊗Os)P 1 ' (Hs⊗Os)H1.
(70)
The real forms of (H⊗ O)P 1C (67) have the general structures
Spin (p, 12− p;C)
Spin (p, 8− p;C)⊗ SU(2)⊗2
structure I
or
Spin (p, 12− p;C)
Spin (p− 4, 12− p;C)⊗ SU(2)⊗2
1
structure II
,
(71)
Spin (p, 12− p;C)
Spin (p− 1, 9− p;C)⊗ SL(2,C)R
structure III
or
Spin (p, 12− p;C)
Spin (p− 3, 11− p;C)⊗ SL(2,C)R
structure IV
,
(72)
Spin (p, 12− p;C)
Spin (p− 2, 10− p;C)⊗ SL(2,R)⊗2
structure V
,
(73)
Y32 :=
SO∗ (12)
SO∗ (8)⊗ SO∗ (4)
'
SO∗ (12)
Spin (6, 2)⊗ SU (2)⊗ SL (2,R)
,
(74)
with p = 0, 1, ..., 12, such that structures I and II (and structures III and IV ) get exchanged
(while structure V is invariant) under p↔ 12− p.
(H⊗ O)P 1, (H⊗ O)H1 and (H⊗ Os)P 1 respectively correspond to structure I with p = 0,
8, 4 (or structure II with p = 12, 4, 8), whereas (Hs⊗O)P 1 and (Hs⊗Os)P 1 respectively
correspond to structure V with p = 2 (or p = 10) and p = 6.
All other real forms of (H⊗ O)P 1C (67), and in particular (74), cannot be characterized as
Rosenfeld lines over H(or Hs)⊗O(or Os).
6.4 O⊗ O
In the octooctonionic case, i.e.
for O ⊗ O, the starting point is given by the octooctonionic
projective line over C, i.e. by the locally symmetric coset manifold having as isometry group
Spin (16,C) with Spin (8,C)⊗Spin(8,C) as isotropy group :
(O⊗ O)P 1C '
Spin (12,C)
Spin (8,C)⊗ Spin (8,C)
.
(75)
26By real forms of (H⊗ O)P 1C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact and
non-compact) forms of Spin(12,C), and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms
of Spin(8,C)⊗Spin(4,C) which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of Spin(12,C).
21
In this coset space formulation, the tangent space of (O⊗ O)P 1C can be identified with the
(
8(v,s,c),8(v,s,c)
)
representation of Spin(8,C)⊗Spin(8,C), where, as above, d4-triality [Por] al-
lows to equivalently choose v, s, or c (in all possible pairs for the two Spin(8,C) factors of the
isotropy group).
Then, by specifying the formulæ (56) and (57) for A = O or Os and B = O or Os, we obtain
all real forms27 of (75) which can be expressed as Rosenfeld lines over O(or Os)⊗O(or Os); they
are summarized by the following Table :
Plane
Isometry
Isotropy
#nc #c
χ
(O⊗ O)P 1
Spin (16)
Spin (8)⊗ Spin (8)
0
64 −64
(O⊗ O)H1
Spin (8, 8)
Spin (8)⊗ Spin (8)
64
0
64
(O⊗ Os)P 1
Spin (12, 4)
Spin (8)⊗ Spin (4, 4)
32
32
0
(Os ⊗ Os)P 1
Spin (8, 8)
Spin (4, 4)⊗ Spin (4, 4)
32
32
0
along with
(O⊗ Os)P 1 ' (O⊗ Os)H1,
(76)
(Os⊗Os)P 1 ' (Os⊗Os)H1.
(77)
The real forms of (O⊗ O)P 1C (75) have the general structures
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p, 8− p;C)⊗ Spin (8,C)
structure I
or
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 8, 16− p;C)⊗ Spin (8,C)
structure II
,
(78)
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 1, 9− p;C)⊗ Spin (1, 7;C)
structure III
or
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 7, 15− p;C)⊗ Spin (1, 7;C)
structure IV
,
(79)
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 2, 10− p;C)⊗ Spin (2, 6;C)
structure V
or
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 6, 14− p;C)⊗ Spin (2, 6;C)
structure V I
, (80)
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 3, 11− p;C)⊗ Spin (3, 5;C)
structure V II
or
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 5, 13− p;C)⊗ Spin (3, 5;C)
structure V III
, (81)
Spin (p, 16− p;C)
Spin (p− 4, 12− p;C)⊗ Spin (4, 4;C)
structure IX
,
(82)
Y64 :=
SO∗ (16)
SO∗ (8)⊗ SO∗ (8)
'
SO∗ (16)
Spin (6, 2)⊗ Spin (6, 2)
,
(83)
with p = 0, 1, ..., 16, such that structures I and II, III and IV , V and V I, V II and V III get
exchanged (while structure IX is invariant) under p↔ 16− p.
The planes (O⊗ O)P 1, (O⊗ O)H1 and (O⊗ Os)P 1 respectively correspond to structure I
with p = 0, 8, 4 (or structure II with p = 16, 8, 12), whereas (Os⊗Os)P 1 corresponds to
structure IX with p = 8. All other real forms of (O⊗ O)P 1C (75), and in particular (83), cannot
be characterized as Rosenfeld lines over O(or Os)⊗O(or Os).
27By real forms of (O⊗ O)P 1C, we here mean the cosets with isometry groups given by all real (compact and
non-compact) forms of Spin(16,C), and with isotropy group given by all (compact and non-compact) real forms
of Spin(8,C)⊗Spin(8,C) which are subgroups of the corresponding real form of Spin(16,C).
22
7 Conclusions
In this work, in order to provide a rigorous characterization of Rosenfeld “projective” spaces over
(rank-2) tensor products of (division or split) Hurwitz algebras, we have introduced some “magic”
formulæ (28)-(30) (for planes) and (56)-(57) (for lines), which allowed us to characterize many
Rosenfeld spaces as symmetric (pseudo-)Riemannian cosets, whose isometry and isotropy groups
have Lie algebras which are entries of real forms of the order-3 (Freudenthal-Tits [Ti, Fr65])
Magic Square, or of the order-2 (Barton-Sudbery [BS03]) Magic Square.
For “projective” planes, the application of the “magic” formulæ (28)-(30) to the case in
which at least one of the two Hurwitz algebras in the associated tensor product is given by the
octonions O or by the split octonions Os, allows us to retrieve all (compact and non-compact)
real forms of the corresponding octonionic Rosenfeld planes, except for a limited numbers of
pseudo-Riemannian symmetric cosets, named X32,I , X32,II , X64,I , X64,II ,X64,III , X128,I and
X128,II , and respectively given by (37), (38), (43), (44), (45), (52) and (53). All such cosets
share a common property : up to some possible rank-1 Lie group factor, their isotropy group
is given by the non-compact Lie group SO∗ (N) for N = 10, 12, 16. The fact that such spaces
are not encompassed by our “magic” formulæ (28)-(30) is ultimately due to the fact that the
corresponding Lie algebra so∗(N) does not occur in any real form of the Magic Square of order
2 (except for the case N = 8, for which it holds the special isomorphism so∗(8) ' so(6, 2)).
For “projective” lines, the application of the “magic” formulæ (56)-(57) to the case in which at
least one of the two Hurwitz algebras in the associated tensor product is given by the octonions
O or by the split octonions Os, allows us to retrieve some (compact and non-compact) real
forms of the corresponding octonionic Rosenfeld lines, but still a number of other real forms of
Rosenfeld lines is left out. Again, there are spaces, such as Y16, Y32 and Y64 (respectively given
by (66), (74) and (83)) that have their isometry and isotropy groups containing factors SO∗(M)
for M = 4, 8, 10, 12, 16; but there are also other pseudo-Riemannian spaces left out, given by
(59), (64)-(65), (71)-(73) and (78)-(82).
The fact that some pseudo-Riemannian symmetric spaces are not covered by the classification
yielded by the “magic” formulæ (28)-(30) and (56)-(57), which are related to the entries of the
Magic Squares of order 2 and 3, means that not all real forms of Rosenfeld spaces can be realized
as “projective” lines or planes over (rank 2) tensor products of (division or split) Hurwitz algebras.
If one still believe that Rosenfeld’s approach was right after all, one might want to extend our
“magic” formulæ to involve not only unital, alternative composition algebras, i.e. (division or
split) Hurwitz algebras, but also other algebras which are not unital or alternative. Extensive
work on Magic Squares over flexible composition algebras has been done by Elduque (see e.g.
[El04, El02]), whereas a geometrical framework for these algebras has been recently discussed
in [CZ22] and [CMZ22].
Therefore, after all, Rosenfeld might still be right....we hope to report on this in forthcoming
investigations.
Acknowledgments
The work of D. Corradetti is supported by a grant of the Quantum Gravity Research Institute.
The work of AM is supported by a “Maria Zambrano” distinguished researcher fellowship at
the University of Murcia, ES, financed by the European Union within the NextGenerationEU
program.
23
References
[Ar]
Arvanitoyeorgos A., An Introduction to Lie Groups and the Geometry of Homoge-
neous Spaces, Americam Mathematical Society, 2003.
[AB]
Atiyah M., Berndt J., Projective planes, Severi varieties and spheres, Surveys in
Differential Geometry Volume 8 (2003), 1-27.
[Ats]
Atsuyama K., Another construction of real simple Lie algebras, Kodai Math. J.,
Tome 6 (1983) no. 1, 122-133.
[Atsu2]
Atsuyama K., Projective spaces in a wider sense. II, Kodai Math. J. 20(1): 41-52
(1997).
[ABDHN]
Anastasiou A. , Borsten L., Duff M.J., Hughes L.J., Nagy S., A magic pyramid of
supergravities, JHEP 04 (2014) 178, arXiv: 1312.6523 [hep-th].
[ABHN]
Anastasiou A., Borsten L., Hughes M. J., Nagy S., Global symmetries of Yang-
Mills squared in various dimensions, JHEP 01 (2016) 148, arXiv: 1502.05359
[hep-th].
[ABDHN14] Anastasiou A., Borsten L., Duff M. J., Hughes M. J., Nagy S., Super Yang-Mills,
division algebras and triality, J. High En. Phys. 1408 (2014) 080, arXiv:1309.0546
[hep-th].
[Ba]
Baez J. C., The octonions, Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 39 (2002) 145-205, erratum in :
Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 42 (2005) 213, math/0105155 [math.RA].
[BD]
Bentz L., Dray T., Subalgebras of the Split Octonions, Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras
28 (2018) 2, 40.
[Be]
Besse A. L. : “Einstein Manifolds”, Classics in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin-
Heidelberg (1987).
[BG]
Bars I., Günaydin M., Construction of Lie Algebras and Lie Superalgebras From
Ternary Algebras, J. Math. Phys. 20 (1979) 1977.
[BM]
Borsten L., Marrani A., A Kind of Magic, Class. Quant. Grav. 34 (2017) 23,
235014, arXiv:1707.02072 [hep-th].
[Br00]
Bryant R. L., Pseudo-Riemannian metrics with parallel spinor fields and vanish-
ing Ricci tensor, in : “Global analysis and harmonic analysis” (Marseille-Luminy,
1999), vol. 4 of Semin. Congr., pp. 53–94. Soc. Math. France, Paris (2000).
[Br99]
Bryant R. L., Remarks on spinors in low dimension, unpublished notes, 1999.
[BS00]
Barton C. H., Sudbery A., Magic Squares of Lie Algebras, math/0001083
[math.RA].
[BS03]
Barton C.H., Sudbery A., Magic squares and matrix models of Lie algebras, Adv.
Math. 180 (2) (2003) 596-647, math/0203010 [math.RA].
[CCM]
Cacciatori S. L., Cerchiai B. L., Marrani A., Squaring the Magic, Adv. Theor.
Math. Phys. 19 (2015) 923-954, arXiv: 1208.6153 [math-ph].
[Car]
Cartan E., La theorie des groupes continus et la geometrie, extended translation of
a paper by G. Fano for Encycl. Sci. Math., Œuvres completes III, (1915), 1727-
1861.
24
[Ca19]
Castro Perelman C. , RCHO-valued gravity as a grand unified field theory, Adv.
Appl. Clifford Algebras 29 (2019) no.1, 22.
[Ca19b]
Castro Perelman C., On CHO-valued gravity, sedenions, hermitian matrix geometry
and nonsymmetric Kaluza- Klein theory, Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras 29 (2019)
no.3, 58.
[CFG]
Cecotti S., Ferrara S., Girardello L., Geometry of Type II Superstrings and the
Moduli of Superconformal Field Theories, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A4 (1989) 2475.
[Con37]
Conway A., Quaternion treatment of relativistic wave equation, Proc. R. Soc. Lond.
Ser. A, Math. Phys. Sci., 162 (909) (1937).
[CMCAb]
Corradetti D., Marrani A., Chester D., Aschheim R., Octonionic Planes and
Real Forms of G2, F4 and E6, Proc. Geom. Int. Quant. 23 (2022) 39-57,
arXiv:2203.02671 [math.RA].
[CMCAa]
Corradetti D., Marrani A., Chester D., Aschheim R., Conjugation Matters. Bioc-
tonionic Veronese Vectors and Cayley-Rosenfeld Planes, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod.
Phys. 19 (2022) 09, 2250142, arXiv:2202.02050 [math-ph].
[CZ22]
Corradetti D., Zucconi F., A Geometrical Interpretation of Okubo Spin Group, J.
Geom. Phys. 182 (2022) 104641, arXiv:2202.10356 [math.RA].
[CMZ22]
Corradetti D., Marrani A., Zucconi F., Deformation of the Okubic Albert alge-
bra and its relation to the Okubic affine and projective planes, arXiv:2208.03967
[math.RA].
[Di]
Dixon, G. M. : “Division algebras: Octonions, quaternions, complex numbers and
the algebraic design of physics”, Kluwer Academic Publishers (1994).
[DHK]
Dray T., Huerta J., Kincaid J., The Magic Square of Lie Groups: The 2×2 Case,
Lett. Math. Phys. 104 (2014) 11, 1445-1468, arXiv: 2009.00390 [math.RA].
[DHW]
Dasgupta K., Hussin V., Wissanji A., Quaternionic Kähler Manifolds, Con-
strained Instantons and the Magic Square. I, Nucl. Phys. B793 (2008) 34-82,
arXiv0:708.1023 [hep-th].
[El18]
Elduque A., Composition algebras;
in :
“Algebra and Applications I: Non-
associative Algebras and Categories”, Chap. 2, pp. 27-57 (A. Makhlouf ed.),
Sciences-Mathematics, ISTE-Wiley, London (2021).
[El02]
Elduque A., The magic square and symmetric compositions, Revista Mat.
Iberoamericana 20 (2004), no. 2, 475-491.
[El04]
Elduque A., A new look at Freudenthal’s magic square, in : “Non Associative Alge-
bra and Its Applications”, (L. Sabinin, L. Sbitneva, I.P. Shestakov, eds.), Lecture
Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 246, pp. 149-165, Chapman and
Hall, Boca Raton (2006).
[Ev]
Evans J.M., Trialities and Exceptional Lie Algebras: Deconstructing the Magic
Square, arXiv:0910.1828 [hep-th].
[FF17]
Fré P., Fedotov A., Groups and Manifolds: Lectures for Physicists with Examples
in Mathematica, De Gruyter, Boston (2017), pp. 323-350.
[Fr63]
Freudenthal H., Beziehungen der E7 und E8 zur Oktavenebene. X, XI, Indagationes
Mathematicæ 25 (1963), 457-471, 472-487.
25
[Fr65]
Freudenthal H., Lie groups in the foundations of geometry, Advances in Mathe-
matics, volume 1, (1965), 145-190.
[Fu14]
Furey C., Generations:
three prints,
in colour, JHEP 10 (2014) 046,
arXiv:1405.4601 [hep-th].
[Fu15]
Furey C., Standard Model physics from an algebra? PhD thesis, University of
Waterloo, 2015, arXiv:1611.09182 [hep-th].
[Fu18]
Furey C., Three generations,
two unbroken gauge symmetries, and one
eight-dimensional algebra, Phys. Lett. B785 (2018) 84-89, arXiv:1910.08395
[hep-th].
[FH22]
Furey N., Hughes M., One generation of standard model Weyl representations as a
single copy of R⊗C⊗H⊗O, Phys. Lett. B827 (2022) 136959, arXiv:2209.13016
[hep-ph].
[Gr]
Gresnigt N., Sedenions, the Clifford algebra Cl(8), and three fermion generations,
PoS EPS-HEP2019 (2020) 615.
[GG73]
Günaydin M., Gürsey F., Quark structure and the octonions, J. Math. Phys. 14
(11) (1973).
[Gun76]
Günaydin M., Octonionic Hilbert spaces, the Poincaré group and SU (3 ), J. Math.
Phys. 17 (1976) 1875.
[GSS]
Günaydin M., Samtleben H., Sezgin E., On the Magical Supergravities in Six Di-
mensions, Nucl. Phys. B848 (2011) 62-89, arXiv: 1012.1818 [hep-th].
[GST]
Günaydin M., Sierra G., Townsend P.K., Exceptional Supergravity Theories and
the Magic Square, Phys. Lett. B133 (1983) 72-76.
[Ha]
Hasebe K., The Split-Algebras and Non-compact Hopf Maps, J. Math. Phys. 51
(2010) 053524, arXiv:0905.2792 [math-ph].
[He]
Helgason S. : “Differential Geometry, Lie Groups, and Symmetric Spaces”, Grad-
uate Studies in Mathematics 34, AMS (2001).
[Hur]
Hurwitz A., Uber die Composition der quadratischen Formen von beliebig vielen
Variabeln, Nachr. Ges. Wiss. Gottingen, 309-316 (1898).
[Ja]
Jacobson N. :
“Structure and Representations of Jordan Algebras”, American
Mathematical Society Providence, RI (1968).
[JVW]
Jordan P., von Neumann, J., Wigner, E, On an algebraic generalization of the
quantum mechanical formalism, Ann. Math. 35, 29–64 (1934).
[Ka]
I. L. Kantor, Models of exceptional Lie algebras, Soviet Math. Dokl, vol. 14, 254-
258 (1973).
[Kr11]
Krasnov K., Spin(11 , 3 ), particles and octonions, J. Math. Phys. 63 (2022) 3,
031701, arXiv:2104.01786 [hep-th].
[KT]
Kugo T., Townsend P.K., Supersymmetry and the Division Algebras, Nucl. Phys.
B221 (1983) 357-380.
[LM01]
Landsberg J., Manivel L., The Projective Geometry of Freudenthal’s Magic Square,
J. of Algebra 239 2 (2001) 477-512, math/9908039 [math.AG].
26
[LM06]
Landsberg J., Manivel L., The sextonions and e7 12 , Advances in Mathematics 201
(2006) no. 1, 143-179, math/0402157 [math.RT].
[LG72]
Lorente M., Gruber B., Classification of Semisimple Subalgebras of Simple Lie
Algebras, J. Math. Phys. 13 10 (1972) 1639-1663.
[MD]
Manogue C.A., Dray T., Octonions, E6, and particle physics, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.,
254 (2010) 012005, arXiv:0911.2253 [math.RA].
[Ma]
Masi N., An exceptional G(2) extension of the Standard Model from the correspon-
dence with Cayley–Dickson algebras automorphism groups, Sci. Rep. 11, 22528
(2021), arXiv:2111.11849 [hep-ph].
[McCr]
McCrimmon K. : “A Taste of Jordan Algebras”, Springer-Verlag, New York (2004).
[Min]
Minchenko A. N., The Semisimple Algebras of Exceptional Lie Algebras, Trans.
Moscow Math. Soc. 67 (2006) 225-259.
[MNY]
Mkrtchyan R., Nersessian A., Yeghikyan V., Hopf maps and Wigner’s little groups,
Mod. Phys. Lett. A26 (2011) 1393-1405, arXiv: 1008.2589 [hep-th].
[MR70]
Michel L., Radicati L., Properties of the Breaking of Hadronic Internal Symmetry,
Ann. of Phys 66 (1971) 758-783.
[MR73]
Michel L., Radicati L., The geometry of the octet, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincare 18
(1973) 185.
[N8]
Borsten L., Dahanayake D., Duff M. J., Ferrara S., Marrani A., Rubens W., Obser-
vations on Integral and Continuous U-duality Orbits in N= 8 Supergravity, Class.
Quant. Grav. 27 (2010) 185003, arXiv:1002.4223 [hep-th].
[OV]
Onishchik A. L. , Vinberg E. B. : “Lie Groups and Lie Algebras III”, Springer,
Berlin (1991).
[Pa]
Palmkvist J., A generalization of the Kantor-Koecher-Tits construction, J. General.
Lie Theor. Appl. 2 (2008) 226, arXiv:1308.3761 [math.RA].
[Por]
Porteous I. : “Clifford algebras and the classical groups”, Cambridge Studies in
Advanced Mathematics 50, Cambridge University Press (1995).
[Ro93]
Rosenfeld B. A., Spaces with Exceptional Fundamental Groups, Publications de
l’Institut Mathématique, nouvelle série tome 54 (68), 97-119 (1993).
[Ro97]
Rosenfeld B. A. : “Geometry of Lie Groups”, Kluwer (1997).
[Ro98]
Rosenfeld B. A., Geometry of Planes over Nonassociative Algebras, Acta Appl.
Math. 50 (1998) 103-110.
[Sa]
Santander M., A perspective on the Magic Square and the ’special unitary’ realiza-
tions of simple Lie algebras, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 10 08 (2013) 1360002,
arXiv:2208.14702 [math-ph].
[Si87]
Sierra G., An application to the theories of Jordan algebras and Freudenthal triple
systems to particles and strings, Class. Quant. Grav. 4 (1987) 227.
[SH]
Santander M., Herranz F., ‘Cayley-Klein’ schemes for real Lie algebras and Freud-
hental magic squares, in : “Group21. Physical Applications and Mathematical As-
pects of Geometry, Groups and Algebras, Vol. I”, Eds: H.D. Doebner, P. Natter-
mann, W. Scherer, (World Scientific, Singapore), 1997, pp.151-156.
27
[SO]
Borsten L., Duff M. J., Ferrara S., Marrani A., Rubens W., Small Orbits, Phys.
Rev. D85 (2012) 086002, arXiv: 1108.0424 [hep-th].
[Sud]
Sudbery A., Division algebras,(pseudo) orthogonal groups and spinors, J. Phys.
A17, vol. 5, 939 (1984).
[Te]
Tent K. (ed.) : “Tits buildings and the model theory of groups”, vol. 291 of London
Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, Cambridge University Press (2002).
[Ti]
Tits J., Algébres alternatives, algébres de Jordan et algébres de Lie exceptionnelles,
Indagationes Mathematicæ 28 (1966) 223–237.
[Ti2]
Tits J. : “Buildings of spherical type and finite BN-pairs”, vol. 386 of Lecture
Notes in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg (1974).
[To18]
Todorov I., Dubois-Violette M., Deducing the symmetry of the Standard Model
from the automorphism and structure groups of the exceptional Jordan algebra,
Int. J. Mod. Phys. A33 (20) (2018) 1850118, arXiv:1806.09450 [hep-th].
[Vin66]
Vinberg E. B., A construction of exceptional simple Lie groups, Tr. Semin. Vektorn.
Tensorn. Anal. 13 (1966) no. 7-9.
[Wes]
Westbury B. W., Sextonions and the magic square, Journal of the London Mathe-
matical Society 73 (2006) no. 2, 455–474, math/0411428 [math.RA].
[WDM]
Wilson R.A., Dray T., Manogue C.A., An octonionic construction of E8 and the
Lie algebra magic square, arXiv:2204.04996 [math.GR].
[Yo85]
Yokota I., Non-symmetry of Freudenthal’s magic square, J. Fac. Sci. Shinshu Univ.
Vol. 20(1), 13 (1985).
[Yo09]
Yokota I., Exceptional Lie Groups, arXiv:0902.0431 [math.DG].
28