format: text

text:
# On the Decoupling of the Homogeneous and Inhomogeneous Parts in Inhomogeneous Quantum Groups

## 1 Introduction

As known, given a unital module algebra $`𝒜`$ of a Lie algebra g  (over the field $``$, say), one can build a new module algebra, called cross-product $`U\text{}<𝒜`$, that is as a vector space the tensor product $`𝒜U\text{}`$ of the vector spaces $`𝒜,U\text{}`$ (over the same field) and has the product law

$`(\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜g)(\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜g^{})=(\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜gg^{}),`$ (1.1)
$`(a\mathrm{𝟏}_H)(a^{}\mathrm{𝟏}_H)=aa^{}\mathrm{𝟏}_H,`$ (1.2)
$`(a\mathrm{𝟏}_H)(\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜g)=ag,`$ (1.3)
$`(\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜g)(a\mathrm{𝟏}_H)=g_{(1)}ag_{(2)},`$ (1.4)
for any $`g,g^{}U\text{}`$, $`a,a^{}𝒜`$. Here we have denoted by $``$ the left action of the Hopf algebra $`HU\text{}`$ on $`𝒜`$,

$$:(g,a)H\times 𝒜ga𝒜,$$
(1.5)
and used a Sweedler-type notation with suppressed summation sign for the coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }(g)`$ of $`g`$, namely the short-hand notation $`\mathrm{\Delta }(g)=g_{(1)}\mathbf{}g_{(2)}`$ instead of a sum $`\mathrm{\Delta }(g)=_\mu g_{(1)}^\mu \mathbf{}g_{(2)}^\mu `$ of many terms. In the main part of this paper we shall work with a left action and therefore left-module algebras. In section 4 we shall give the formulae if we use instead a right action $``$ and right-module algebras. By definition of a (left) action, for any $`g,g^{}H`$, $`a,a^{}𝒜`$,

$`(gg^{})a=g(g^{}a)`$ (1.6)
$`g(aa^{})=(g_{(1)}a)(g_{(2)}a^{});`$ (1.7)
We recall that the coproduct on the unit and on any $`g\text{}`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{𝟏}_H)=\mathrm{𝟏}_H\mathrm{𝟏}_H\mathrm{\Delta }(g)=g\mathrm{𝟏}_H+\mathrm{𝟏}_Hg;$$
(1.8)
on the rest of $`U\text{}`$ it is determined using the fact that it is an algebra homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Delta }:HH\mathbf{}H`$. Clearly, the coproduct is cocommutative, i.e. $`g_{(1)}\mathbf{}g_{(2)}=g_{(2)}\mathbf{}g_{(1)}`$.

For the sake of clearness, above and in the sequel we denote the tensor products of vector spaces and of algebras by $``$ and $`\mathbf{}`$ (in boldface) respectively; therefore, given two unital algebras $`B,B^{}`$ (over the same field), $`B\mathbf{}B^{}`$ is $`BB^{}`$ as a vector space, while as an algebra it is characterized by the product

$$(aa^{})(bb^{})=(aba^{}b^{})$$
(1.9)
for any $`a,bB`$ and $`a^{},b^{}B^{}`$.

In the sequel, with a standard abuse of notation, for any unital algebras $`B,B^{}`$ and any $`bB`$, $`b^{}B^{}`$ we shall denote by $`bb^{}`$ the element $`bb^{}`$ in the tensor product of vector spaces $`BB^{}`$ and omit either unit $`\mathrm{𝟏}_B,\mathrm{𝟏}_B^{}`$ whenever multiplied by non-unit elements (thus, $`\mathrm{𝟏}_BB^{},B\mathrm{𝟏}_B^{}`$ will be denoted by $`B^{},B`$). Consequently, in the case of e.g. the cross product algebra $`U\text{}<𝒜`$ relations (1.1-1.3) take trivial forms, whereas (1.4) becomes the commutation relation

$$ga=(g_{(1)}a)g_{(2)};$$
(1.10)
whereas for a tensor product algebra $`B\mathbf{}B^{}`$ the analogs of relations (1.1-1.3) again take trivial forms, whereas (1.9) for $`a=\mathrm{𝟏}_B`$, $`b^{}=\mathrm{𝟏}_B^{}`$ becomes the trivial commutation relation

$$a^{}b=ba^{}.$$
(1.11)
Of course, $`B\mathbf{}B^{}`$ is isomorphic to $`B^{}\mathbf{}B`$.

$`H<𝒜`$ is itself a module algebra under the left action $``$ of $`H`$ if we extend the latter on the elements of the $`H`$ subalgebra as the adjoint action,

$$gh=g_{(1)}hSg_{(2)}g,hH;$$
(1.12)
(here $`S`$ denotes the antipode of $`H`$), and set as usual

$$g(ah)=g_{(1)}ag_{(2)}h;$$

note that, in the notation mentioned above this relation takes the same form as (1.7), i.e. becomes $`g(ah)=(g_{(1)}a)(g_{(2)}h)`$. It is immediate to show that relation (1.10) implies that one can realize the action $`:H\times (H<𝒜)H<𝒜`$ in the ‘adjoint-like way’

$$g\eta =g_{(1)}\eta Sg_{(2)}$$
(1.13)
on all of $`H<𝒜`$.

Classical examples of cross product algebras are the universal enveloping algebras of inhomogeneous Lie groups, like the Poincaré algebra, where $`H=Uso(3,1)`$ is the algebra generated by infinitesimal Lorentz transformations and $`𝒜`$ is the abelian algebra generated by infinitesimal translations on Minkowski space, or the Euclidean algebra, where $`𝒜`$ is the abelian algebra generated by infinitesimal translations on the $`N`$-dimensional Euclidean space $`^N`$ and $`H=Uso(N)`$ is the algebra generated by its infinitesimal rotations.

The above setting can be “deformed” by allowing $`H`$ to be a non-cocommutative Hopf algebra, e.g. the quantum group $`U_q\text{g}`$ , and as $`𝒜`$ the corresponding $`q`$-deformed module algebra. In general, the latter will be no more abelian, even if its classical counterpart is. A cross product $`H<𝒜`$ can be still defined by means of the same formulae (1.5-1.10).

In this paper we want to show that there are prominent examples of cross products $`H<𝒜`$ that are isomorphic to $`𝒜\mathbf{}H`$, more precisely are equal to $`𝒜H^{}`$ with $`H^{}H<𝒜`$ a subalgebra isomorphic to $`H`$ and commuting with $`𝒜`$, even if this is not the case for their undeformed counterparts. As we shall see, this occurs if there exists an algebra homomorphism $`\phi `$ of the cross product into $`𝒜`$ acting identically on the latter. Of course, this will have dramatic consequences for the cross product both from the algebraic and from the representation-theoretic viewpoint; it will allow to reduce representations of $`H<𝒜`$ to direct sums of tensor products of representations of $`𝒜`$ and of $`H^{}`$. To prevent misunderstandings, we note that in general if $`H<𝒜`$ itself is a Hopf algebra, as in the case of inhomogeneous quantum groups, neither $`𝒜`$ nor $`H^{}`$ will be a Hopf subalgebra of $`H<𝒜`$.

The present work has been inspired among others by the results of Ref. . In Ref.  the existence of such a $`H^{}`$ for the $`q`$-deformed Euclidean algebra in three dimensions has been noted; its generators have been constructed “by hand” and have been used to decouple $`q`$-rotations from $`q`$-translations in the $``$-representations of $`H<𝒜`$. In Ref.  we had constructed “by hand” for the $`q`$-deformed Euclidean algebra in $`N3`$ dimensions a set of generators which do the same job; but, instead of commuting with the $`q`$-deformed generators of translations, they $`q`$-commute with the latter. Now, a posteriori, one can check that they can be obtained as products of suitable elements of $`H^{}`$ by suitable elements of the natural Cartan (i.e. maximal abelian) Hopf subalgebra of $`H=U_qso(N)`$.

On the contrary, the present work gives a very simple prescription for their construction, based on the existence of $`\phi `$. The prescription can be thus applied to a number of models, including the following. In Ref.  a class of homomorphisms (2.1-2.2) has been determined for a slightly enlarged version $`𝒜`$ of the algebra of functions on the $`N`$-dimensional quantum Euclidean space $`_q^N`$ or quantum Euclidean sphere $`S_q^{N1}`$, the Hopf algebra $`H`$ denoting $`U_qso(N)`$ itself if $`N`$ is odd, either the Borel subalgebra $`U_q^+so(N)`$ or the one $`U_q^{}so(N)`$ if $`N`$ is even. Their behaviour under the $``$-structures has been investigated in Ref.  (where incidentally we draw another consequence of its existence, namely the possibility of “unbraiding” braided tensor product algebras). This will be explicitly described in section 5.1. The analogous maps for the $`q`$-deformed fuzzy sphere $`S_{q,M}^2`$ have been found in . On the other hand, the existence of algebra homomorphisms (2.1) for $`H=U_qso(N),U_qsl(N)`$ and $`𝒜`$ respectively equal to (a suitable completion of) the $`U_qso(N)`$-covariant Heisenberg algebra or the $`U_qsl(N)`$-covariant Heisenberg (or Clifford) algebras, has been known for even a longer time . This will be treated in section 5.2. Note that in the latter cases $`\phi `$ exist also for the undeformed counterparts at $`q=1`$, thus our results will apply also in this case (we do not know whether this has ever been formulated as a result in ordinary Lie group theory).

In section 2 we state and prove the main results of this work leading to the construction of $`H^{}`$. In section 3 we focus on the $``$-structures. In section 4 we give without proof for right-module algebras all the main formulae valid for left-module algebras. In section 5 we apply our results to the two examples of cross-product algebras mentioned above.

We conclude this section with some additional preliminaries. Beside the Sweedler-type notation with lower indices introduced for the coproduct, we shall denote a sum of many terms in a tensor product by a Sweedler-type notation with upper indices and suppressed summation sign, e.g. $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}`$ will actually mean a sum $`_\mu c_\mu ^{(1)}c_\mu ^{(2)}`$. Secondly, we can also introduce an ‘opposite’ action $`^{op}:H\times (H<𝒜)H<𝒜`$, i.e. an action of the Hopf algebra with the same algebra structure and counit but opposite coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{op}(g)=g_{(2)}\mathbf{}g_{(1)}`$ and inverse antipode, by

$$g^{op}\eta =g_{(2)}\eta S^1g_{(1)}.$$
(1.14)
It fulfills

$`(gg^{})^{op}a=g^{op}(g^{}^{op}a)`$ (1.15)
$`g^{op}(aa^{})=(g_{(2)}^{op}a)(g_{(1)}^{op}a^{}).`$ (1.16)
(Note that $`g^{op}a`$ in general is not an element of $`𝒜`$).

## 2 The commutant of $`𝒜`$ within $`H<𝒜`$

### 2.1 The basic construction

In this subsection we assume that there exists an algebra homomorphism

$$\phi :H<𝒜𝒜$$
(2.1)
acting as the identity on $`𝒜`$, namely for any $`a𝒜`$

$$\phi (a)=a.$$
(2.2)
(Note that, as a consequence, $`\phi `$ is idempotent: $`\phi ^2=\phi `$). More explicitly, the fact that $`\phi `$ is a homomorphism implies that for any $`a𝒜`$, $`gH`$

$$\phi (g)a=(g_{(1)}a)\phi (g_{(2)}).$$
(2.3)
\[Note that (unless the left action of $`H`$ on $`𝒜`$ is trivial), no $`\phi `$ can exist if $`𝒜`$ is abelian, e.g. for the Euclidean algebra $`Uso(N)<^N`$; but, as we shall recall later, $`\phi `$ exists for the $`q`$-deformed Euclidean algebra, and therefore the result will apply.\]

Let $`𝒞`$ be the commutant of $`𝒜`$ within $`H<𝒜`$, i.e. the subalgebra

$$𝒞:=\{cH<𝒜|[c,a]=0a𝒜\}.$$
(2.4)
Clearly $`𝒞`$ contains the center $`𝒵(𝒜)`$ of $`𝒜`$. Let $`\zeta :HH<𝒜`$ be the map defined by

$$\zeta (g):=\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(2)}.$$
(2.5)
Note that if in the definition of $`\zeta `$ we drop $`\phi `$, we get instead the counit $`\epsilon `$. Similarly, if we apply $`\phi `$ to $`\zeta `$ and recall that $`\phi `$ is both a homomorphism and idempotent we also find

$$\phi \zeta =\epsilon .$$
(2.6)
Now, $`\epsilon (g)`$ is a complex number times $`\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜`$ and therefore trivially commutes with $`𝒜`$. Since $`\phi `$ does not change the commutation relations between $`𝒜`$ and $`H`$, we expect that also $`\zeta (g)`$ commutes with $`𝒜`$. This is confirmed by

###### Theorem 1

Let $`H`$ be a Hopf algebra, $`𝒜`$ a $`H`$-module algebra, $`𝒞`$ the commutant (2.4), and $`\phi `$ an homomorphism of the type (2.1), (2.2). Then (2.5) defines an injective algebra homomorphism $`\zeta :H𝒞`$; moreover $`𝒞=𝒵(𝒜)\zeta (H)`$ and $`H<𝒜=𝒜\zeta (H)`$. If, in particular $`𝒵(𝒜)=`$, then $`𝒞=\zeta (H)`$ and $`\zeta :H𝒞`$ is an algebra isomorphism.

In other words, the subalgebra $`H^{}`$ looked for in the introduction will be obtained by setting $`H^{}:=\zeta (H)`$. For these reasons we shall call $`\zeta `$, as well as the other maps $`\zeta _i,\zeta _i^\pm `$ which we shall introduce below, decoupling maps.

Proof  For any $`a𝒜`$,

$`\zeta (g)a`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(2)}a`$ (2.7)
$`\stackrel{(\text{1.10})}{=}`$ $`\phi (Sg_{(1)})(g_{(2)}a)g_{(3)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.3})}{=}`$ $`[Sg_{(2)}(g_{(3)}a)]\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(4)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{1.6})}{=}`$ $`[(Sg_{(2)}g_{(3)})a]\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(4)}`$
$`=`$ $`[\epsilon (g_{(2)})\mathrm{𝟏}_Ha]\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(3)}`$
$`=`$ $`a\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(2)}=a\zeta (g),`$
proving that $`\zeta (g)𝒞`$. Using (2.7) with $`a=\phi (Sg_{(1^{})}^{})`$ we find

$`\zeta (gg^{})`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`\phi [S(g_{(1)}g_{(1^{})}^{})]g_{(2)}g_{(2^{})}^{}=\phi (Sg_{(1^{})}^{})\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(2)}g_{(2^{})}^{}`$ (2.8)
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`\phi (Sg_{(1^{})}^{})\zeta (g)g_{(2^{})}^{}\stackrel{(\text{2.7})}{=}\zeta (g)\phi (Sg_{(1^{})}^{})g_{(2^{})}^{}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`\zeta (g)\zeta (g^{}),`$
proving that $`\zeta `$ is a homomorphism. To prove that $`\zeta `$ is injective note that $`\zeta (g)=\zeta (g^{})`$ implies

$$\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(2)}=\phi (Sg_{(1)}^{})g_{(2)}^{},$$

whence, by applying $`(m\text{id })(\text{id }\phi \text{id })(\text{id }\mathrm{\Delta })`$ we find $`g=g^{}`$ (we have denoted by $`m`$ the multiplication map of $`𝒜`$, $`m(ab)=ab`$).

Now, consider a generic element $`cH<𝒜`$ and decompose it in the form $`c=c^{(1)}c^{(2)}`$ with $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}𝒜H`$. From (2.5) it immediately follows that

$$c=c^{(1)}c^{(2)}=c^{(1)}\phi \left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\zeta \left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right),$$

showing that $`H<𝒜=𝒜\zeta (H)`$, because $`c^{(1)}\phi \left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)𝒜`$. In particular, assume $`c𝒞`$. Then

$$0=[a,c]=[a,c^{(1)}\phi \left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\zeta \left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right)]\stackrel{(\text{2.7})}{=}[a,c^{(1)}\phi \left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)]\zeta \left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right);$$

since $`\zeta `$ is injective, all factors $`\zeta \left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right)`$ are linearly independent and therefore

$$[a,c^{(1)}\phi \left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)]=0,$$

whence we conclude that $`c^{(1)}\phi \left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)𝒵(𝒜)`$ and $`c𝒵(𝒜)\zeta (H)`$. $``$$``$

###### Corollary 1

Under the same assumptions of Thm. 1 the center of the cross-product $`H<𝒜`$ is given by

$$𝒵(H<𝒜)=𝒵(𝒜)\zeta \left(𝒵(H)\right).$$
(2.9)
Moreover, if $`H_c,𝒜_c`$ are maximal abelian subalgebras of $`H`$ and $`𝒜`$ respectively, then $`𝒜_c\zeta (H_c)`$ is a maximal abelian subalgebra of $`H<𝒜`$.

This is almost all what we need in the determination of the Casimirs and of a complete set of commuting observables of a quantum system whose algebra of observables is equal to (or contains) $`H<𝒜`$, as in Ref. . In addition we just need that these two subalgebras be closed under the corresponding $``$-structure of $`H<𝒜`$, what will be investigated in section 3.

Proof  The proof of the second statement is immediate. As for the first, if $`c𝒵(H)`$ then $`[c,H]=0`$ and, applying the homomorphism $`\zeta `$, $`[\zeta (c),\zeta (H)]=0`$; on the other hand $`[\zeta (c),𝒜]=0`$ by (2.7). Hence, $`\zeta (c)`$ commutes with $`𝒜\zeta (H)`$, i.e. with $`H<𝒜`$, by theorem 1. Similarly if $`\stackrel{~}{c}𝒵(𝒜)`$ then $`[\stackrel{~}{c},𝒜]=0`$; on the other hand $`[\stackrel{~}{c},\zeta (H)]=0`$ by (2.7). Hence $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ commutes with $`H<𝒜`$. Therefore $`𝒵(𝒜)\zeta \left(𝒵(H)\right)𝒵(H<𝒜)`$.

Viceversa, by theorem 1 any $`cH<𝒜`$ can be expressed in the form $`c=c^{(1)}\zeta \left(c^{(2)}\right)`$ with $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}𝒜H`$. If in particular $`c𝒵(H<𝒜)`$, then it must be on one hand

$$0=[c^{(1)}\zeta \left(c^{(2)}\right),𝒜]=[c^{(1)},𝒜]\zeta \left(c^{(2)}\right),$$

implying $`c^{(1)}𝒵(𝒜)`$ by the linear independence of all factors $`\zeta \left(c^{(2)}\right)`$; on the other hand it must be

$$0=[c^{(1)}\zeta \left(c^{(2)}\right),\zeta (H)]=c^{(1)}[\zeta \left(c^{(2)}\right),\zeta (H)]=c^{(1)}\zeta \left([c^{(2)},H]\right),$$

implying $`c^{(2)}𝒵(H)`$, by the linear independence of all factors $`c^{(1)}`$ and the injectivity of $`\zeta `$. Therefore $`𝒵(H<𝒜)𝒵(𝒜)\zeta \left(𝒵(H)\right)`$. $``$$``$

Using the results of the theorem we easily show that the restrictions of the left action of $`H`$ to $`\phi (H)`$ and $`H`$ itself \[see (1.12)\] look the same:

###### Proposition 1

Under the same assumptions of Thm. 1, on the images of $`\phi `$ the left action reads

$$g\phi (h)=\phi (gh);$$
(2.10)
equivalently,

$$g\phi (h)=\phi (g_{(1)}h)g_{(2)}.$$
(2.11)
Proof

$`\phi (gh)`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{1.12})}{=}`$ $`\phi (g_{(1)}hSg_{(2)})=\phi (g_{(1)})\phi (h)\phi (Sg_{(2)})`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`\phi (g_{(1)})\phi (h)\zeta (g_{(2)})Sg_{(3)}\stackrel{(\text{2.7})}{=}\phi (g_{(1)})\zeta (g_{(2)})\phi (h)Sg_{(3)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`g_{(1)}\phi (h)Sg_{(2)}\stackrel{(\text{1.12})}{=}g\phi (h).`$
$``$$``$

Apart from $`\zeta _1\zeta `$, other maps fulfilling the same property (2.6) are

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \zeta _2(g):=g_{(2)}\phi (S^1g_{(1)})\hfill \\ \zeta _3(g):=Sg_{(1)}\phi (g_{(2)})\hfill & \zeta _4(g):=\phi (g_{(2)})S^1g_{(1)}\hfill \\ \zeta _5(g):=g_{(1)}\phi (Sg_{(2)})\hfill & \zeta _6(g):=\phi (S^1g_{(2)})g_{(1)}\hfill \\ \zeta _7(g):=S^1g_{(2)}\phi (g_{(1)})\hfill & \zeta _8(g):=\phi (g_{(1)})Sg_{(2)}\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.12)
One could wonder whether they also fulfill the previous theorems. Using (2.11) one can easily show that:

* $$\zeta _2=\zeta ;$$
(2.13)
* $`\zeta _3=\zeta S`$, $`\zeta _4=\zeta _2S^1=\zeta S^1`$ so that $`\zeta _3(g),\zeta _4(g)𝒞`$, but $`\zeta _3,\zeta _4`$ are antihomomorphisms;
* $`\zeta _5,\zeta _6,\zeta _7,\zeta _8`$ do not map $`H`$ into $`𝒞`$.

Let us prove for instance the first statement:

$`\zeta _2(g)`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{2.12})}{=}`$ $`g_{(2)}\phi (S^1g_{(1)})\stackrel{(\text{2.11})}{=}\phi (g_{(2)}S^1g_{(1)})g_{(3)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{1.12})}{=}`$ $`\phi (g_{(2)}S^1g_{(1)}Sg_{(3)})g_{(4)}=\phi (Sg_{(1)})g_{(2)}\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}\zeta (g).`$
How does $`\zeta (H)`$ transform under the action $``$ of $`H`$? One can easily verify that it is not mapped into itself. On the contrary, under the opposite action $`^{op}`$ it is:

###### Proposition 2

Under the same assumptions of Thm. 1, for any $`g,hH`$

$`h^{op}\zeta (g)=\zeta (h^{op}g),`$ (2.14)
$`h\zeta (g)=\zeta (h_{(2)}^{op}g)h_{(1)}.`$ (2.15)
Proof  By (1.13), (2.15) is a direct consequence of (2.14). To prove the latter,

$`\zeta (h^{op}g)`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{1.14})}{=}`$ $`\zeta (h_{(2)}gS^1h_{(1)})\stackrel{(\text{2.8})}{=}\zeta (h_{(2)})\zeta (g)\zeta (S^1h_{(1)})`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.5}),(\text{2.13})}{=}`$ $`\zeta _2(h_{(3)})\zeta (g)\phi (h_{(2)})S^1h_{(1)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.7})}{=}`$ $`\zeta _2(h_{(3)})\phi (h_{(2)})\zeta (g)S^1h_{(1)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.12})}{=}`$ $`h_{(4)}\phi (S^1h_{(3)})\phi (h_{2)})\zeta (g)S^1h_{(1)}`$
$`=`$ $`h_{(2)}\zeta (g)S^1h_{(1)}\stackrel{(\text{1.14})}{=}h^{op}\zeta (g).`$
$``$$``$

### 2.2 Construction adapted to Gauss decompositions of $`H`$

In view of the applications that we shall consider in section 5 it is now useful to consider the case that, instead of a $`\phi `$ we just have at our disposal two homomorphisms $`\phi ^+,\phi ^{}`$

$$\phi ^\pm :H^\pm <𝒜𝒜$$
(2.16)
fulfilling (2.2), where $`H^+,H^{}`$ denote two Hopf subalgebras of $`H`$ such that Gauss decompositions $`H=H^+H^{}=H^{}H^+`$ hold. (The typical case is when $`H=U_q\text{g}\text{ }`$ and $`H^+,H^{}`$ denote its positive and negative Borel subalgebras.) Then the theorems listed so far will apply separately to $`H^+<𝒜`$ and $`H^{}<𝒜`$, if we define corresponding maps $`\zeta ^\pm :H^\pm 𝒜`$ by

$$\zeta ^\pm (g):=\phi ^\pm (Sg_{(1)})g_{(2)},$$
(2.17)
where $`gH^\pm `$ respectively. What can we say about the whole $`H<𝒜`$? We now prove

###### Theorem 2

Let $`H`$ be a Hopf algebra, $`𝒜`$ a $`H`$-module algebra, $`𝒞`$ the commutant (2.4), and $`\phi ^\pm `$ homomorphisms of the type (2.16), (2.2). Under the above assumptions formulae (2.17) define injective algebra homomorphisms $`\zeta ^\pm :H^\pm 𝒞`$. Moreover,

$$𝒞=𝒵(𝒜)\zeta ^+(H^+)\zeta ^{}(H^{})=𝒵(𝒜)\zeta ^{}(H^{})\zeta ^+(H^+)$$
(2.18)
and

$$H<𝒜=𝒜\zeta ^+(H^+)\zeta ^{}(H^{})=𝒜\zeta ^{}(H^{})\zeta ^+(H^+).$$
(2.19)
In particular, if $`𝒵(𝒜)=`$, then $`𝒞=\zeta ^+(H^+)\zeta ^{}(H^{})=\zeta ^{}(H^{})\zeta ^+(H^+)`$.

Proof  As anticipated, the fact that $`\zeta ^\pm `$ are injective algebra homomorphisms $`\zeta ^\pm :H^\pm 𝒞`$ follows from theorem 1. Now, by the Gauss decomposition $`H=H^+H^{}`$ a generic element $`cH<𝒜`$ can be decomposed in the form $`c=c^{(1)}c^{(2)}c^{(3)}`$ with $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}c^{(3)}𝒜H^+H^{}`$; again, the Sweedler-type notation at the rhs means that a sum of many terms is understood. From (2.17) it immediately follows that

$`c`$ $`=`$ $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}c^{(3)}`$
$`=`$ $`c^{(1)}\phi ^+\left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\zeta ^+\left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right)\phi ^{}\left(c_{(1^{})}^{(3)}\right)\zeta ^{}\left(c_{(2^{})}^{(3)}\right)`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.7})}{=}`$ $`\zeta ^+\left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right)\zeta ^{}\left(c_{(2^{})}^{(3)}\right)c^{(1)}\phi ^+\left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\phi ^{}\left(c_{(1^{})}^{(3)}\right),`$
showing that $`H<𝒜=𝒜\zeta ^+(H^+)\zeta ^{}(H^{})`$. In particular, assume $`c𝒞`$. Then

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`[a,c]=[a,c^{(1)}\phi ^+\left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\phi ^{}\left(c_{(1^{})}^{(3)}\right)\zeta ^+\left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right)\zeta ^{}\left(c_{(2^{})}^{(3)}\right)]`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.7})}{=}`$ $`[a,c^{(1)}\phi ^+\left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\phi ^{}\left(c_{(1^{})}^{(3)}\right)]\zeta ^+\left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right)\zeta ^{}\left(c_{(2^{})}^{(3)}\right);`$
since $`\zeta ^+,\zeta ^{}`$ are injective, all factors $`\zeta ^+\left(c_{(2)}^{(2)}\right)\zeta ^{}\left(c_{(2^{})}^{(3)}\right)`$ are linearly independent and therefore

$$[a,c^{(1)}\phi ^+\left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\phi ^{}\left(c_{(1^{})}^{(3)}\right)]=0,$$

whence we conclude that $`c^{(1)}\phi ^+\left(c_{(1)}^{(2)}\right)\phi ^{}\left(c_{(1^{})}^{(3)}\right)𝒵(𝒜)`$ and $`c`$ belongs to $`𝒵(𝒜)\zeta ^+(H^+)\zeta ^{}(H^{})`$.

The proof of the claims with $`\zeta ^+(H^+),\zeta ^{}(H^{})`$ in the inverse order follow in the same way from the Gauss decomposition $`H=H^{}H^+`$. $``$$``$

As a consequence of this theorem, for any $`g^+H^+`$, $`g^{}H^{}`$ there exists a sum $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}c^{(3)}𝒵(𝒜)H^{}H^+`$ (depending on $`g^+,g^{}`$) such that

$$\zeta ^+(g^+)\zeta ^{}(g^{})=c^{(1)}\zeta ^{}(c^{(2)})\zeta ^+(c^{(3)}).$$
(2.20)
These will be the “commutation relations” between elements of $`\zeta ^+(H^+)`$ and $`\zeta ^{}(H^{})`$. Their form will depend on the specific algebras considered. In section 5 we shall determine these commutation relations for two examples of cross products with $`H=U_q\text{g}\text{ }`$ using the Faddeev-Reshetikhin-Takhtadjan generators of $`U_q\text{g}`$ .

Of course propositions 2.11, 2 will still apply to the present situation if both $`g,h`$ belong to $`H^+`$ and we replace $`\phi ,\zeta `$, by $`\phi ^+,\zeta ^+`$ (or the same with $`+`$ replaced by $``$). What can we say otherwise?

###### Proposition 3

Under the same assumptions of Thm. 2, if $`gH^\pm `$, $`hH^{}`$

$`g\phi ^{}(h)=\phi ^\pm (g_{(1)})\phi ^{}(h)\phi ^\pm (Sg_{(2)}),`$ (2.21)
$`g\phi ^{}(h)=\phi ^\pm (g_{(1)})\phi ^{}(h)\phi ^\pm (Sg_{(2)})g_{(3)},`$ (2.22)
$`g^{op}\zeta ^{}(h)=\zeta ^\pm (g_{(2)})\zeta ^{}(h)\zeta ^\pm (S^1g_{(1)}),`$ (2.23)
$`g\zeta ^{}(h)=\zeta ^\pm (g_{(3)})\zeta ^{}(h)\zeta ^\pm (S^1g_{(2)})g_{(1)}.`$ (2.24)
The proof uses theorem 2 and is similar to the proofs of Propositions 2.11, 2. Similarly, the analog of Corollary 1 reads

###### Corollary 2

Under the same assumptions of Thm. 2, any element $`c`$ of the center $`𝒵(H<𝒜)`$ of the cross-product $`H<𝒜`$ can be expressed in the form

$$c=\zeta ^+\left(c^{(1)}\right)\zeta ^{}\left(c^{(2)}\right)c^{(3)},$$
(2.25)
where $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}c^{(3)}H^+H^{}𝒵(𝒜)`$ and $`c^{(1)}c^{(2)}c^{(3)}𝒵(H)𝒵(𝒜)`$; viceversa any such object $`c`$ is an element of $`𝒵(H<𝒜)`$. If $`H_cH^+H^{}`$ and $`𝒜_c`$ are maximal abelian subalgebras of $`H`$ and $`𝒜`$ respectively, then $`𝒜_c\zeta ^+(H_c)`$ (as well as $`𝒜_c\zeta ^{}(H_c)`$) is a maximal abelian subalgebra of $`H<𝒜`$.

## 3 $``$-structures

Assume that $`H`$ is a Hopf $``$-algebra and $`𝒜`$ a $`H`$-module $``$-algebra, which means that on $`H`$ and $`𝒜`$ there exist antilinear involutive antihomomorphisms, which we both denote by the symbol $``$, such that

$`[\epsilon (g)]^{}=\epsilon (g^{})`$ (3.1)
$`(g^{})_{(1)}\mathbf{}(g^{})_{(2)}=(g_{(1)})^{}\mathbf{}(g_{(2)})^{}`$ (3.2)
$`(Sg)^{}=S^1g^{}`$ (3.3)
$`(ga_i)^{}=(S^1g^{})a_i^{}`$ (3.4)
\[actually (3.3) is a consequence of (3.1), (3.2) and of the uniqueness of the antipode\]. Then these two $``$-structures can be glued in a unique one to make $`H<𝒜`$ a $``$-algebra itself. If

$$\phi :H<𝒜𝒜$$
(3.5)
is a homomorphism acting as the identity on $`𝒜`$, then it is straightforward to check that $`\phi ^{}:=\phi `$ also is. As a consequence, if in a concrete case we know that such a homomorphism is unique, then $`\phi ^{}=\phi `$ and we automatically conclude that it is a $``$-homomorphism,

$$\phi (\alpha ^{})=[\phi (\alpha )]^{},\alpha H<𝒜.$$
(3.6)
More generally, if the homomorphism $`\phi `$ is not unique, it is natural to look for one that is a $``$-homomorphism. We shall give explicit examples of this in section 5.

###### Proposition 4

If $`\phi :H<𝒜𝒜`$ is a $``$-homomorphism, then also the map $`\zeta :H𝒞`$ is.

Proof

$`\zeta (g^{})`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`\phi (Sg_{(1)}^{})g_{(2)}^{}\stackrel{(\text{3.3}),(\text{3.2})}{=}\phi \left((S^1g_{(1)})^{}\right)g_{(2)}^{}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{3.6})}{=}`$ $`\left[\phi \left(S^1g_{(1)}\right)\right]^{}g_{(2)}^{}=\left[g_{(2)}\phi \left(S^1g_{(1)}\right)\right]^{}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.12})}{=}`$ $`[\zeta _2(g)]^{}\stackrel{(\text{2.13})}{=}[\zeta (g)]^{}.`$
$``$$``$

Alternatively, it may happen that no $``$-homomorphism $`\phi `$ exists, but there exist homomorphisms $`\phi ^\pm `$ of the type (2.16). If $`H^\pm `$ are Hopf $``$-subalgebras (i.e. are closed under $``$), then also $`\phi ^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm }:=\phi ^\pm `$ are homomorphisms of the type (2.16), and as before we can look for $`\phi ^\pm `$ that are $``$-homomorphisms,

$$\phi ^\pm (\alpha ^{})=[\phi ^\pm (\alpha )]^{},\alpha H^\pm <𝒜.$$
(3.7)
On the contrary, if $`H^\pm `$ are mapped into each other by $``$, then $`\phi ^\pm `$ is a homomorphism of the type $`\phi ^{}`$, and we can look for one such that

$$\phi ^\pm (\alpha ^{})=[\phi ^{}(\alpha )]^{},\alpha H^{}<𝒜.$$
(3.8)
###### Proposition 5

If $`\phi ^\pm `$ are $``$-homomorphism, then also the map $`\zeta ^\pm :H^\pm 𝒞`$ are. If $`\phi ^\pm `$ fulfill (3.8), then $`\zeta ^\pm `$ fulfill

$$\zeta ^\pm (g^{})=[\zeta ^{}(g)]^{},gH^{}.$$
(3.9)
Proof  The first statement amounts to the preceding proposition applied to $`H^\pm <𝒜`$. As for the second, the proof is just a small variation:

$`\zeta ^\pm (g^{})`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{2.5})}{=}`$ $`\phi ^\pm (Sg_{(1)}^{})g_{(2)}^{}\stackrel{(\text{3.3}),(\text{3.2})}{=}\phi ^\pm \left((S^1g_{(1)})^{}\right)g_{(2)}^{}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{3.8})}{=}`$ $`\left[\phi ^{}\left(S^1g_{(1)}\right)\right]^{}g_{(2)}^{}=\left[g_{(2)}\phi ^{}\left(S^1g_{(1)}\right)\right]^{}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{2.12})}{=}`$ $`[\zeta _2^{}(g)]^{}\stackrel{(\text{2.13})}{=}[\zeta ^{}(g)]^{}.`$
$``$$``$

## 4 Formulae for right-module algebras

In this section we give the analogs for right $`H`$-module algebras of the main results found so far for left $`H`$-module algebras. By definition the right action $`:𝒜\times H𝒜`$ fulfills

$`a(gg^{})=(ag)g^{}`$ (4.1)
$`(aa^{})g=(ag_{(1)})(a^{}g_{(2)}).`$ (4.2)
The algebra $`𝒜>H`$ is defined as follows. As a vector space it is $`H𝒜`$, whereas the product is defined through formulae obtained from (1.1-1.3) by flipping the tensor factors, together with

$$(\mathrm{𝟏}_Ha)(g\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜)=g_{(1)}(ag_{(2)})$$

for any $`a𝒜`$, $`gH`$. As before, we shall denote $`ga`$ by $`ga`$ and omit either unit $`\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜,\mathrm{𝟏}_H`$ whenever multiplied by non-unit elements; consequently only the last condition takes a non-trivial form and becomes

$$ag=g_{(1)}(ag_{(2)}).$$
(4.3)
$`𝒜>H`$ itself is a $`H`$-module algebra under the right action $``$ of $`H`$ if we extend the latter on the elements of $`H`$ as the adjoint action,

$$hg=Sg_{(1)}hg_{(2)},g,hH;$$
(4.4)
Let $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$ be the commutant of $`𝒜`$ within $`𝒜>H`$. Clearly it contains the center $`𝒵(𝒜)`$ of $`𝒜`$. We shall need homomorphisms

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }:𝒜>H𝒜$$
(4.5)
acting as the identity on $`𝒜`$, namely for any $`a𝒜`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }(a)=a.$$
(4.6)
###### Theorem 3

Let $`H`$ be a Hopf algebra, $`𝒜`$ a right $`H`$-module algebra, $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$ the commutant of $`𝒜`$ within $`𝒜>H`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ an homomorphism of the type (4.5), (4.6). Then the map $`\zeta _5`$ defined by (2.12) (with $`\phi `$ replaced by $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$) is an injective algebra homomorphism $`\zeta _5:H\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$; moreover $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}=\zeta _5(H)𝒵(𝒜)`$ and $`𝒜>H=\zeta _5(H)𝒜`$. If, in particular $`𝒵(𝒜)=`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}=\zeta (H)`$ and $`\zeta _5:H\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$ is an algebra isomorphism.

Consider the maps $`\zeta _i`$ defined by (2.12), but with $`\phi `$ replaced by $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$. One can easily show that:

* $$\zeta _6=\zeta _5;$$
(4.7)
* $`\zeta _8=\zeta _6S=\zeta _5S`$, $`\zeta _7=\zeta _5S^1`$, so that $`\zeta _7(g),\zeta _8(g)𝒞`$, but $`\zeta _7,\zeta _8`$ are antihomomorphisms;
* $`\zeta _1,\zeta _2,\zeta _3,\zeta _4`$ do not map $`H`$ into $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$.

###### Proposition 6

If $`g,hH`$

$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(h)g=\stackrel{~}{\phi }(hg),`$ (4.8)
$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(h)g=g_{(1)}\stackrel{~}{\phi }(hg_{(2)}).`$ (4.9)
If, instead of a $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$, we just have at our disposal two homomorphisms $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+,\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm :𝒜>H^\pm 𝒜,$$
(4.10)
where $`H^+,H^{}`$ denote two Hopf subalgebras of $`H`$ such that Gauss decompositions $`H=H^+H^{}=H^{}H^+`$ hold, then the theorems listed so far will apply separately to $`𝒜>H^+`$ and $`𝒜>H^{}`$, if we define corresponding maps $`\zeta _5^\pm :H^\pm 𝒜`$ by

$$\zeta _5^\pm (g):=g_{(1)}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (Sg_{(2)}),$$
(4.11)
where $`gH^\pm `$ respectively. More precisely:

###### Theorem 4

Under the above assumptions formulae (4.11) define injective algebra homomorphisms $`\zeta _5^\pm :H^\pm \stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$. Moreover,

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒞}=\zeta _5^+(H^+)\zeta _5^{}(H^{})𝒵(𝒜)=\zeta _5^{}(H^{})\zeta _5^+(H^+)𝒵(𝒜)$$
(4.12)
and

$$𝒜>H=\zeta _5^+(H^+)\zeta _5^{}(H^{})𝒜=\zeta _5^{}(H^{})\zeta _5^+(H^+)𝒜.$$
(4.13)
In particular, if $`𝒵(𝒜)=`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}=\zeta _5^+(H^+)\zeta _5^{}(H^{})=\zeta _5^{}(H^{})\zeta _5^+(H^+)`$.

###### Proposition 7

If $`gH^\pm `$, $`hH^{}`$

$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(h)g=\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (Sg_{(1)})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(h)\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (g_{(2)}),`$ (4.14)
$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(h)g=g_{(1)}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (Sg_{(2)})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(h)\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (g_{(3)}).`$ (4.15)
If $`H`$ is a Hopf $``$-algebra and $`𝒜`$ a $`H`$-module $``$-algebra, then the two $``$-structures of $`H`$ and $`𝒜`$ can be glued into a unique one to make $`𝒜>H`$ a $``$-algebra itself.

###### Proposition 8

If $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:𝒜>H𝒜`$ is a $``$-homomorphism, then also the map $`\zeta _5:H\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$ is.

###### Proposition 9

If the maps $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ defined in (4.11) are $``$-homomorphism, then also the maps $`\zeta _5^\pm :H^\pm 𝒞`$ are. If $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ fulfill

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (\alpha ^{})=[\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(\alpha )]^{},\alpha 𝒜>H^{},$$
(4.16)
then $`\zeta _5^\pm `$ fulfill

$$\zeta _5^\pm (g^{})=[\zeta _5^{}(g)]^{},gH^{}.$$
(4.17)
## 5 Applications

We now consider a couple of applications where $`H`$ is the quantum group $`U_q\text{g}`$ , with $`\text{}=sl(N)`$ or $`\text{}=so(N)`$. As a set of generators of $`U_q\text{g}`$ it is convenient to introduce the FRT generators  $`^+{}_{j}{}^{i},^{}_j^i`$ ($`i,j`$ take $`N`$ different values), together with the square roots of the diagonal elements $`^+{}_{j}{}^{j},^{}_j^j`$. In the appendix we recall the relations they fulfill. The FRT generators are related to the so-called universal $`R`$-matrix $``$ by

$$^+{}_{l}{}^{a}:=^{(1)}\rho _l^a(^{(2)})^{}{}_{l}{}^{a}:=\rho _l^a(^1{}_{}{}^{(1)})^1{}_{}{}^{(2)},$$
(5.1)
where we have denoted by $`\rho `$ the fundamental $`N`$-dimensional representation of $`U_qsl(N)`$ or $`U_qso(N)`$. Since in our conventions $`H^+\mathbf{}H^{}`$ ($`H^+,H^{}`$ denote the positive, negative Borel subalgebras) we see that $`^+{}_{l}{}^{a}H^+`$ and $`^{}{}_{l}{}^{a}H^{}`$.

For historical reasons we introduce algebras $`𝒜`$ as right- (rather than left-) $`U_q\text{g}`$ -module algebras.

### 5.1 The Euclidean quantum group $`_q^N>U_qso(N)`$

As algebra $`𝒜`$ we shall consider a slight extension of the quantum Euclidean space $`_q^N`$  (the $`U_qso(N)`$-covariant quantum space), i.e. of the unital associative algebra generated by $`p^i`$ fulfilling the relations

$$𝒫_a{}_{hk}{}^{ij}p_{}^{h}p^k=0,$$
(5.2)
where $`𝒫_a`$ denotes the $`q`$-deformed antisymmetric projector appearing in the decomposition of the braid matrix $`\widehat{R}`$ of $`U_qso(N)`$ \[given in formula (A)\]; the latter is related to $``$ by $`\widehat{R}_{hk}^{ij}=\rho _h^j(^+{}_{k}{}^{i})=(\rho _h^j\rho _k^i)()`$. The multiplet $`(p^i)`$ carries the fundamental $`N`$-dim (or vector) representation $`\rho `$ of $`U_qso(N)`$: for any $`gU_qso(N)`$

$$p^ig=\rho _j^i(g)p^j.$$
(5.3)
This implies

$`p^i^\pm {}_{b}{}^{a}=^\pm {}_{c}{}^{a}p_{}^{j}\widehat{R}^{\pm 1}{}_{jb}{}^{ci},`$ (5.4)
$`S^\pm {}_{b}{}^{a}p_{}^{i}=\widehat{R}^{\pm 1}{}_{jk}{}^{ai}p_{}^{j}S^\pm {}_{b}{}^{k}.`$ (5.5)
To define $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ one  slightly enlarges $`_q^N`$ as follows. One introduces some new generators $`\sqrt{P_a}`$, with $`1a\frac{N}{2}`$, together with their inverses $`(\sqrt{P_a})^1`$, requiring that

$$P_a^2=\underset{h=a}{\overset{a}{}}p^hp_h=\underset{h,k=a}{\overset{a}{}}g_{hk}p^hp^k.$$
(5.6)
In the previous equation $`g_{hk}`$ denotes the ‘metric matrix’ of $`SO_q(N)`$:

$$g_{ij}=g^{ij}=q^{\rho _i}\delta _{i,j}.$$
(5.7)
It is a $`SO_q(N)`$-isotropic tensor and is a deformation of the ordinary Euclidean metric. Here and in the sequel $`n:=\left[\frac{N}{2}\right]`$ is the rank of $`so(N)`$, the indices take the values $`i=n,\mathrm{},1,0,1,\mathrm{}n`$ for $`N`$ odd, and $`i=n,\mathrm{},1,1,\mathrm{}n`$ for $`N`$ even. We have also introduced the notation $`(\rho _i)=(n\frac{1}{2},\mathrm{},\frac{1}{2},0,\frac{1}{2},\mathrm{},\frac{1}{2}n)`$ for $`N`$ odd, $`(n1,\mathrm{},0,0,\mathrm{},1n)`$ for $`N`$ even. In the sequel we shall call $`P_n^2`$ also $`P^2`$. Moreover for odd $`N`$ we add also $`\sqrt{p^0}`$ and its inverse as new generators. The commutation relations involving these new generators can be fixed consistently, and turn out to be simply $`q`$-commutation relations. $`P`$ plays the role of ‘deformed Euclidean distance’ of the generic ‘point of coordinates’ $`(p^i)`$ of $`_q^N`$ from the ‘origin’; $`P_a`$ is the ‘projection’ of $`P`$ on the ‘subspace’ $`p^i=0`$, $`|i|>a`$. The center of $`_q^N`$ is generated by $`\sqrt{P}`$ and, only in the case of even $`N`$, by $`\sqrt{\frac{p^1}{p^1}}`$ and its inverse $`\sqrt{\frac{p^1}{p^1}}`$. In the case of even $`N`$ one needs to include also the FRT generator $`^{}{}_{1}{}^{1}=^+_1^1`$ and its inverse $`^+{}_{1}{}^{1}=^{}_1^1`$ \[which are generators of $`U_qso(N)`$ belonging to the natural Cartan subalgebra\] among the generators of $`𝒜`$. From (5.4) one derives that they satisfy the commutation relations

$$^{}{}_{1}{}^{1}p_{}^{\pm 1}=q^{\pm 1}p^{\pm 1}^{}{}_{1}{}^{1},^{}{}_{1}{}^{1}p_{}^{\pm i}=p^{\pm i}^{}{}_{1}{}^{1}\text{ for }i>1$$
(5.8)
with the generators of $`𝒜`$, and the standard FRT relations with the rest of $`U_qso(N)`$. As a consequence, $`\sqrt{\frac{p^{\pm 1}}{p^1}}`$ are eliminated from the center of $`𝒜`$ (in fact $`^\pm _1^1`$ do not $`q`$-commute with $`\sqrt{\frac{p^{\pm 1}}{p^1}}`$).

One can easily show that the extension of the action of $`U_qso(N)`$ to $`\sqrt{P_a},(\sqrt{P_a})^1`$ is uniquely determined by the constraints the latter fulfill; it is a bit complicated and therefore will be omitted, since we will not need its explicit expression. We keep the action of $`H`$ on $`^{}_1^1`$ as the standard (right) adjoint action (4.4). Note that the maps $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ have no analog in the “undeformed” case ($`q=1`$), because $`𝒜_1^N`$ is abelian, whereas $`HU_qso(N)`$ is not.

The homomorphisms  $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm :𝒜>U_q^\pm so(N)𝒜`$ take the simplest and most compact expression on the FRT generators of $`U_q^\pm so(N)`$. Let us introduce the short-hand notation $`[A,B]_x=ABxBA`$. The images of $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}`$ on the negative FRT generators read

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})=g^{ih}[\mu _h,p^k]_qg_{kj},$$
(5.9)
where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\mu _0=\gamma _0(p^0)^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ odd,}\hfill \\ \mu _{\pm 1}=\gamma _{\pm 1}(p^{\pm 1})^1^\pm _1^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ even,}\hfill \\ \mu _a=\gamma _aP_{|a|}^1P_{|a|1}^1p^a\hfill & \text{otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.10)
and $`\gamma _a`$ are normalization constants fulfilling the conditions

$$\begin{array}{cc}\gamma _0=q^{\frac{1}{2}}h^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ odd,}\hfill \\ \gamma _{\pm 1}=k^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ even,}\hfill \\ \gamma _1\gamma _1=q^1h^2\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ odd,}\hfill \\ \gamma _a\gamma _a=q^1k^2\omega _a\omega _{a1}\hfill & \text{for }a>1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`h:=q^{\frac{1}{2}}q^{\frac{1}{2}}`$, $`k:=qq^1`$, $`\omega _a:=(q^{\rho _a}+q^{\rho _a})`$. On the other hand, the images of $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+`$ on the positive FRT generators read

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{i})=g^{ih}[\overline{\mu }_h,p^k]_{q^1}g_{kj},$$
(5.11)
where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\overline{\mu }_0=\overline{\gamma }_0(p^0)^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ odd,}\hfill \\ \overline{\mu }_{\pm 1}=\overline{\gamma }_{\pm 1}(p^{\pm 1})^1^{}_1^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ even,}\hfill \\ \overline{\mu }_a=\overline{\gamma }_aP_{|a|}^1P_{|a|1}^1p^a\hfill & \text{otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.12)
and $`\overline{\gamma }_a`$ normalization constants fulfilling the conditions

$$\begin{array}{cc}\overline{\gamma }_0=q^{\frac{1}{2}}h^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ odd,}\hfill \\ \overline{\gamma }_{\pm 1}=k^1\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ even,}\hfill \\ \overline{\gamma }_1\overline{\gamma }_1=qh^2\hfill & \text{for }N\text{ odd,}\hfill \\ \overline{\gamma }_a\overline{\gamma }_a=qk^2\omega _a\omega _{a1}\hfill & \text{for }a>1.\hfill \end{array}$$

From definition (2.12), using (A.13), (5.9), (5.11), (A.14), we find

$$\begin{array}{c}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})=^{}{}_{h}{}^{i}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{}(S^{}{}_{j}{}^{h})=^{}{}_{h}{}^{i}[\mu _h,p^i]_{q}^{},\hfill \\ \zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{i})=^+{}_{h}{}^{i}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{j}{}^{h})=^+{}_{h}{}^{i}[\overline{\mu }_h,p^i]_{q^1}^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.13)
The case of even $`N`$ is slightly outside the scheme developed in the preceding sections. As anticipated, the generators $`^\pm _1^1`$ and their inverses $`^\pm _1^1`$ cannot be realized as (rational) ‘functions’ of the $`p`$’s and have to be introduced in the codomain of $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ as new generators. In fact definitions (5.9), (5.11) are exactly designed to lead to

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (^\pm {}_{1}{}^{1})=^\pm {}_{1}{}^{1}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (^\pm {}_{1}{}^{1})=^\pm {}_{1}{}^{1}.$$
(5.14)
As a consequence, when $`s=\pm 1`$

$`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{s}{}^{s})=^+{}_{k}{}^{s}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{s}{}^{k})\stackrel{(\text{A.1}),(\text{5.14})}{=}^+{}_{s}{}^{s}S^+{}_{s}{}^{s}=1`$ (5.15)
$`\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{s})=^{}{}_{k}{}^{s}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{k})\stackrel{(\text{A.2}),(\text{5.14})}{=}^{}{}_{s}{}^{s}S^{}{}_{s}{}^{s}=1.`$ (5.16)
Moreover, it is easy to check that

$$\begin{array}{c}^{}{}_{1}{}^{1}\zeta _{5}^{\pm }(^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})=\zeta _5^\pm (^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})^{}{}_{1}{}^{1}q_{}^{\eta _i\eta _j}\hfill \\ ^+{}_{1}{}^{1}\zeta _{5}^{\pm }(^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})=\zeta _5^\pm (^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})^+{}_{1}{}^{1}q_{}^{\eta _j\eta _i},\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.17)
where we have introduced the shorthand notation

$$\eta _i:=\delta _i^1\delta _i^1.$$
(5.18)
Therefore, $`\zeta _5^\pm [U_q^\pm so(2n)]`$ do not commute with the whole $`𝒜`$ but only with $`_q^{2n}`$, and the decomposition (4.12) will have to be modified into

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒞}=\zeta _5^+(H^+)\zeta _5^{}(H^{})𝒵(_q^{2n})=\zeta _5^{}(H^{})\zeta _5^+(H^+)𝒵(_q^{2n})$$
(5.19)
with $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$ defined as the commutant of $`_q^{2n}`$ within $`_q^{2n}>U_qso(2n)`$. As said, $`𝒵(_q^{2n})`$ contains also $`\sqrt{\frac{p^{\pm 1}}{p^1}}`$. Since $`\mu _{\pm 1}`$, $`\overline{\mu }_1`$ and therefore $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(^{}{}_{\pm 1}{}^{i})`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(^+{}_{1}{}^{i})`$ are of the form “$`^{}{}_{1}{}^{1}\times `$ an expression depending only on the $`p`$’s”, they $`q`$-commute rather than commute with $`\zeta ^\pm (^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})`$.

For odd and even $`N`$ the commutation relations among the $`\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})`$ or among the $`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{i})`$ are immediately obtained from (A.1-A.6) and (A.8) applying $`\zeta _5^{},\zeta _5^+`$ and using the fact that they are homomorphisms.

To derive the commutation relations between the $`\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})`$ and the $`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{k}{}^{h})`$ \[the analog of (2.20) in explicit form\] we need the commutation relations between the $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})`$ and the $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{i})`$. To proceed we have to distinguish the case of odd and even $`N`$. In the formulation of the following lemma and proposition we switch off Einstein summation convention. In the appendix we prove

###### Lemma 1

If $`N`$ is odd, then

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{h})=\frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}\underset{l,m,r,s}{}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}\frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}.$$
(5.20)
If $`N`$ is even, then if $`k\{1,1\}`$

$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{h})={\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}[{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r,s}{s\pm 1}}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r,s}{s=\pm 1}}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^2],`$ (5.21)
and if $`k\{1,1\}`$

$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{h})={\displaystyle \underset{l,m}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}[{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r,s}{s\pm 1}}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r,s}{s=\pm 1}}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^2]{\displaystyle \frac{p^k}{p^k}}q^{2+2\eta _j\eta _k}.`$ (5.22)
Note that for odd $`N`$ if the ratio $`\frac{\gamma _a}{\overline{\gamma }_a}`$ is independent of $`a`$ (therefore it must be equal to $`\frac{\gamma _0}{\overline{\gamma }_0}=q^1`$), the $`\gamma ,\overline{\gamma }`$’s disappear, and by comparison with (A.7) we find  that setting $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{j}{}^{i})=\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{i})`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})=\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})`$ defines a homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:𝒜>U_qso(N)𝒜`$. For $`|q|=1`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ turns out to be a $``$-homomorphism w.r.t. the corresponding $``$-structures (see below).

###### Proposition 10

If $`N`$ is odd

$$\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{h})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})=\underset{c,d,r,s}{}\widehat{R}^1{}_{cd}{}^{ih}\zeta _{5}^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{d})\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{c})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}\frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}\frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}.$$
(5.23)
If $`N`$ is even, then

$`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{h})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})={\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}q^{2+\eta _s(\eta _r\eta _l)}]\widehat{R}^{rs}_{kj}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$ (5.24)
if $`k\{1,1\}`$, and, if $`k\{1,1\}`$,

$`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{h})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})=q^{2+\eta _j(\eta _i+\eta _k)}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}q^{2+\eta _s(\eta _r\eta _l)}]\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\widehat{R}^{rs}_{k,j}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}{\displaystyle \frac{p^k}{p^k}}.`$ (5.25)
So for even $`N`$ the coefficients in the commutations relations depend explicitly on the central (in $`_q^N`$) elements $`\frac{p^{\pm 1}}{p^1}`$.

Let us analyze now the properties of $`\zeta _5^\pm `$ under $``$-structures. When $`|q|=1`$ the $``$-structure of $`_q^N`$ is given by $`(p^i)^{}=p^i`$. It turns out  that $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ are $``$-homomorphisms if, in addition,

$$\gamma _a^{}=\gamma _a\{\begin{array}{ccc}1\hfill & \text{ if }a<1,\hfill & \text{ or }a=1\text{ and }N\text{ odd;}\hfill \\ q^2\hfill & \text{ if }a>1,\hfill & \text{ or }a=1\text{ and }N\text{ odd.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.26)
Under these assumptions, in view also of (A.15), we can apply proposition 4.17 and we conclude that $`\zeta _5^\pm `$ are $``$-homomorphisms. When $`q^+`$ the real structure of $`_q^N`$ is given by $`(p^i)^{}=p^jg_{ji}`$. It turns out  that $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ fulfill $`[\phi ^\pm (g)]^{}=\phi ^{}(g^{})`$, or more explicitly

$$\left[\phi ^{}(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})\right]^{}=\phi ^+\left[(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})^{}\right],$$
(5.27)
if, in addition,

$$\gamma _a^{}=\overline{\gamma }_a\{\begin{array}{ccc}1\hfill & \text{ if }a<1,\hfill & \text{ or }a=1\text{ and }N\text{ odd;}\hfill \\ q^2\hfill & \text{ if }a>1,\hfill & \text{ or }a=1\text{ and }N\text{ odd.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.28)
Under these assumptions, in view also of (A.17), (A.15), we can apply proposition 4.17 and we conclude that $`\zeta _5^\pm `$ fulfill

$$\zeta _5^\pm (g^{})=[\zeta _5^{}(g)]^{},gH^{}.$$
(5.29)
### 5.2 The cross product of $`U_q\text{g}`$ ’s with $`U_q\text{g}`$ -covariant Heisenberg algebras

As algebra $`𝒜`$ we shall consider a slight extension of the $`U_q\text{g}`$ -covariant deformed Heisenberg algebras $`𝒟_{ϵ,\text{}}`$, $`\text{}=sl(N),so(N)`$. Such algebras have been introduced in Ref. . They are unital associative algebras generated by $`x^i,_j`$ fulfilling the relations

$$𝒫_a{}_{hk}{}^{ij}x_{}^{h}x^k=0,𝒫_a{}_{hk}{}^{ij}_{j}^{}_i=0,_ix^j=\delta _j^i+(q\gamma \widehat{R})^ϵ{}_{ih}{}^{jk}x_{}^{h}_k,$$
(5.30)
where $`\gamma =q^{\frac{1}{N}},1`$ respectively for $`\text{}=sl(N),so(N)`$, and the exponent $`ϵ`$ can take either value $`ϵ=1,1`$. $`\widehat{R}`$ denotes the braid matrix of $`U_q\text{g}`$  \[given in formulae (A.9), (A)\], and the matrix $`𝒫_a`$ is the deformed antisymmetric projector appearing in the decompositions (A.11), (A.12) of the latter. The coordinates $`x^i`$, as the $`p^i`$ of subsection 5.1, transform according to the fundamental $`N`$-dimensional representation $`\rho `$ of $`U_q\text{g}`$ , whereas the ‘partial derivatives’ transform according the contragradient representation,

$$x^ig=\rho _j^i(g)x^j,_ig=_h\rho _i^h(S^1g).$$
(5.31)
In our conventions the indices will take the values $`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$ if $`\text{}=sl(N)`$, whereas if $`\text{}=so(N)`$ they will take the same values considered in subsection 5.1. In fact the quantum Euclidean space can be considered as a subalgebra of the $`U_qso(N)`$-covariant Heisenberg algebra, either by the identification $`p^ix^i`$ or by the one $`p^ig^{ij}_j`$.

Algebra homomorphisms $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:𝒜>H𝒜`$, for $`H=U_q\text{g}\text{ }`$ and $`𝒜`$ equal to (a suitable completion of) $`𝒟_{ϵ,\text{}}`$ have been constructed in Ref. . This is the $`q`$-analog of the well-known fact that the elements of g  can be realized as “vector fields” (first order differential operators) on the corresponding g -covariant (undeformed) space, e.g. $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(E_j^i)=x^i_j\frac{1}{N}\delta _j^i`$ in the $`\text{}=sl(N)`$ case. This means that our decoupling map $`\zeta _5`$ exists also in the undeformed case; we don’t know whether this result in Lie group representation theory has ever been formulated before.

The explicit expression of $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})`$ in terms of $`x^i,_j`$ for $`U_qsl(2),U_qso(3)`$ has been given in Ref. . For different values of $`N`$ it can be found from the results of Ref.  by passing from the generators adopted there to the FRT generators. For example, for $`\text{}=sl(2)`$ and $`ϵ=1`$ one finds

$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{1}{}^{1})=\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{2}{}^{2})=[\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{1}{}^{1})]^1=[\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{2}{}^{2})]^1=\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }^{\frac{1}{2}}[1+(q^21)x^2_2]^{\frac{1}{2}}`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{2}{}^{1})=\alpha kq^1\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\frac{1}{2}}[1+(q^21)x^2_2]^{\frac{1}{2}}x^1_2`$ (5.32)
$`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{1}{}^{2})=\alpha kq^3\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\frac{1}{2}}[1+(q^21)x^2_2]^{\frac{1}{2}}x^2_1,`$
where $`\alpha `$ is fixed by (A.7) to be $`\alpha =\pm 1,\pm i`$ and we have set

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^2:=1+(q^21)x^i_i.$$
(5.33)
Whereas for $`\text{}=so(3)`$ and $`ϵ=1`$ one finds on the positive Borel subalgebra

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{}{}^{})=\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }[1+(q1)x^0_0+(q^21)x^+_+]\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{0}{}^{})=\alpha k\mathrm{\Lambda }(x^{}_0\sqrt{q}x^0_+)\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{+}{}^{})=\frac{1}{1+q^1}\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{0}{}^{})\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{+}{}^{0})\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{0}{}^{0})=1\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{+}{}^{0})=q^{\frac{1}{2}}[\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{}{}^{})]^1\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{0}{}^{})\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{+}{}^{+})=[\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^+{}_{}{}^{})]^1\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.34)
and on the negative Borel subalgebra

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{}{}^{})=\left(\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }[1+(q1)x^0_0+(q^21)x^+_+]\right)^1\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{}{}^{0})=\alpha q^2k\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{}{}^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(x^0_{}\sqrt{q}x^+_0)\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{}{}^{+})=\frac{1}{1+q}\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{0}{}^{+})\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{}{}^{0})\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{0}{}^{0})=1\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{0}{}^{+})=\alpha q^{\frac{3}{2}}k\mathrm{\Lambda }(x^0_{}\sqrt{q}x^+_0)\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{+}{}^{+})=[\stackrel{~}{\phi }(^{}{}_{}{}^{})]^1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.35)
Here we have set

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^2:=[1+(q^21)x^i_i+\frac{(q^21)^2}{\omega _1^2}(g_{ij}x^ix^j)(g^{hk}_k_h)],$$
(5.36)
where

$$\omega _a:=(q^{\rho _a}+q^{\rho _a}),$$

and replaced for simplicity the values $`1,0,1`$ of the indices by the ones $`,0,+`$. In either case the $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$-images of $`^+_j^i`$ and $`^{}_i^j`$ for $`i>j`$ vanish, because the latter do.

We see that strictly speaking $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ takes values in some appropriate completion of $`𝒟_{ϵ,\text{}}`$, containing at least the square root and inverse square root of the polynomial $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ respectively defined in (5.33), (5.36), as well as the square root of $`[1+(q^21)x^2_2]`$ and its inverse, when $`\text{}=sl(2)`$, and the inverses (5.34)<sub>6</sub>, (5.35)<sub>6</sub>, when $`\text{}=so(3)`$. Apart from this minimal completion, another possible one is the so-called $`h`$-adic, namely the ring of formal power series in $`h=\mathrm{log}q`$ with coefficients in $`𝒟_{ϵ,\text{}}`$. Other completions, e.g. in operator norms, can be considered according to the needs. One can easily show that the extension of the action of $`H`$ to any such completion is uniquely determined (we omit to write down its explicit expression, since we don’t need it).

$`𝒜>H`$ is a $``$-algebra and the map $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ is a $``$-homomorphism both for $`q`$ real and $`|q|=1`$. The $``$-structure of $`𝒜`$ is

$$(x^i)^{}=x^i,(_i)^{}=_i\{\begin{array}{cc}q^{\pm 2(Ni+1)}\text{ if }H=U_qsl(N)\hfill & \\ q^{\pm N+\rho _i}\text{ if }H=U_qso(N)\hfill & \end{array}$$
(5.37)
if $`|q|=1`$, and

$$(x^h)^{}=x^kg_{kh},(_i)^{}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\pm 2}}{q^{\pm N}+q^{\pm 2}}[(g^{jh}_h_j),x^i]$$
(5.38)
if $`H=U_qso(N)`$ and $`q^+`$. The upper or lower sign respectively refer to the choices $`ϵ=1,1`$ in (5.30)<sub>3</sub>, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\pm 2}`$ are respectively defined by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\pm 2}:=\left[1+(q^{\pm 2}1)x^i_i+\frac{(q^{\pm 2}1)^2}{\omega _n^2}r^2(g^{ji}_i_j)\right]^1.$$
(5.39)
In either case, in view also of (A.17), we can apply proposition 8 and we conclude that $`\zeta _5`$ is a $``$-homomorphism.

## A Appendix

#### Basic properties of $`U_q\text{g}`$

For both $`H=U_qsl(N),U_qso(N)`$ the FRT generators fulfill the relations

$`^+{}_{j}{}^{i}=0,\text{if }i>j,`$ (A.1)
$`^{}{}_{j}{}^{i}=0,\text{if }i<j,`$ (A.2)
$`^{}{}_{i}{}^{i}_{}^{+}{}_{i}{}^{i}=^+{}_{i}{}^{i}_{}^{}{}_{i}{}^{i}=1,i`$ (A.3)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}^+{}_{i}{}^{i}=1,{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}^{}{}_{i}{}^{i}=1,`$ (A.4)
$`\widehat{R}_{cd}^{ab}^+{}_{f}{}^{d}_{}^{+}{}_{e}{}^{c}=^+{}_{c}{}^{b}_{}^{+}{}_{d}{}^{a}\widehat{R}_{ef}^{dc},`$ (A.5)
$`\widehat{R}_{cd}^{ab}^{}{}_{f}{}^{d}_{}^{}{}_{e}{}^{c}=^{}{}_{c}{}^{b}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{a}\widehat{R}_{ef}^{dc},`$ (A.6)
$`\widehat{R}_{cd}^{ab}^+{}_{f}{}^{d}_{}^{}{}_{e}{}^{c}=^{}{}_{c}{}^{b}_{}^{+}{}_{d}{}^{a}\widehat{R}_{ef}^{dc};`$ (A.7)
in addition, when $`H=U_qso(N)`$ they also fulfill

$$^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i}_{}^{\pm }{}_{k}{}^{h}g_{}^{kj}=g^{hi}^\pm {}_{i}{}^{j}_{}^{\pm }{}_{h}{}^{k}g_{kj}^{}=g_{hi}.$$
(A.8)
Here $`\widehat{R}_{cd}^{ab}`$ denotes the braid matrix of $`U_qsl(N),U_qso(N)`$, and $`g^{hi}`$ the metric matrix of $`U_qso(N)`$, which was defined in (5.7). The square roots of the diagonal elements $`^{}_i^i`$, as well as the the square roots of the diagonal elements $`^+_i^i`$, generate the same Cartan subalgebra of $`H`$, which coincides with $`H^+H^{}`$. The braid matrix $`\widehat{R}`$ of $`U_qsl(N)`$ is given by

$$\widehat{R}=q^{\frac{1}{N}}\left[q\underset{i}{}e_i^ie_i^i+\underset{ij}{}e_i^je_j^i+k\underset{i<j}{}e_i^ie_j^j\right]$$
(A.9)
where all indices $`i,j,a,\mathrm{}=1,2,\mathrm{},N`$, and $`e_j^i`$ is the $`N\times N`$ matrix with all elements equal to zero except for a $`1`$ in the $`i`$th column and $`j`$th row. When $`H=U_qso(N)`$ it is convenient to adopt the convention that all indices $`i,j,a,\mathrm{}`$ take the values $`i=n,\mathrm{},1,0,1,\mathrm{}n`$ for $`N`$ odd, and $`i=n,\mathrm{},1,1,\mathrm{}n`$ for $`N`$ even, where $`n:=\left[\frac{N}{2}\right]`$ is the rank of $`so(N)`$. Then the corresponding braid matrix reads

$`\widehat{R}`$ $`=`$ $`q{\displaystyle \underset{i0}{}}e_i^ie_i^i+{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{ij,j}{\text{ or }i=j=0}}{}}e_i^je_j^i+q^1{\displaystyle \underset{i0}{}}e_i^ie_i^i`$
$`+k({\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{}}e_i^ie_j^j{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{}}q^{\rho _i+\rho _j}e_i^je_i^j).`$
The braid matrix of $`sl(N)`$ admits the orthogonal projector decomposition

$$q^{\frac{1}{N}}\widehat{R}=q𝒫_Sq^1𝒫_a,\text{}=sl(N);$$
(A.11)
$`𝒫_a,𝒫_S`$ are the $`U_qsl(N)`$-covariant deformed antisymmetric and symmetric projectors. The braid matrix of $`so(N)`$ admits the orthogonal projector decomposition

$$\widehat{R}=q𝒫_sq^1𝒫_a+q^{1N}𝒫_t\text{}=so(N);$$
(A.12)
$`𝒫_a,𝒫_t,𝒫_s`$ are the corresponding $`q`$-deformed antisymmetric, trace, trace-free symmetric projectors.

By iterated use of equations (A.5-A.7) one immediately shows that they hold also if $`\widehat{R}`$ is replaced by any polynomial function $`f(\widehat{R})`$ of $`\widehat{R}`$, in particular by $`f(\widehat{R})=\widehat{R}^1,𝒫_a`$.

Finally, the coproduct of the FRT generators is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(^+{}_{j}{}^{i})=^+{}_{h}{}^{i}^+{}_{j}{}^{h},\mathrm{\Delta }(^{}{}_{j}{}^{i})=^{}{}_{h}{}^{i}^{}{}_{j}{}^{h}.$$
(A.13)
When $`H=U_qso(N)`$ the antipode is given by

$$S^{}{}_{i}{}^{j}=g_{ih}^{}{}_{k}{}^{h}g_{}^{kj}.$$
(A.14)
The non-compact real sections of $`U_q\text{g}`$ require $`|q|=1`$ and are characterized by the $``$-structure

$$(^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})^{}=U^1{}_{r}{}^{i}_{}^{\pm }{}_{s}{}^{r}U_{j}^{s}.$$
(A.15)
Here one can take

$$U_j^i:=\{\begin{array}{cc}g^{ih}g_{jh}\text{ if }\text{}=so(N),\hfill & \\ q^i\delta _j^i\text{ if }\text{}=sl(N)\hfill & \end{array}.$$
(A.16)
The compact real section of $`U_q\text{g}`$ requires $`q^+`$ if $`\text{}=so(N)`$, $`q`$ if $`\text{}=sl(N)`$ and is characterized by the $``$-structure

$$(^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})^{}=S^{}{}_{i}{}^{j}.$$
(A.17)
For $`\text{}=so(N)`$ this amounts to

$$(^\pm {}_{j}{}^{i})^{}=g_{ih}^{}{}_{k}{}^{h}g_{}^{kj}.$$
(A.18)
#### Proof of Lemma 1

We start by recalling two relations proved in Lemma 2 of Ref.

$$\begin{array}{c}\mu _a\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{b}{}^{i})=\widehat{R}^1{}_{ab}{}^{cd}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{}(S^{}{}_{c}{}^{i})\mu _d,\hfill \\ \overline{\mu }_a\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{b}{}^{i})=\widehat{R}_{ab}^{cd}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{c}{}^{i})\overline{\mu }_d.\hfill \end{array}$$
(A.19)
Applying $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm `$ to (5.5) we find

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (S^\pm {}_{b}{}^{a})p^i=\widehat{R}^{\pm 1}{}_{jk}{}^{ai}p_{}^{j}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^\pm (S^\pm {}_{b}{}^{k}).$$
(A.20)
We finally note that

$$\overline{\mu }_{\pm 1}=\mu _1\frac{p^1}{p^{\pm 1}}q^2.$$
(A.21)
The claim is a direct consequence of relations (A.19), (A.20), (A.21).

#### Proof of Proposition 10

For odd $`N`$

$`\text{lhs}(\text{5.23})`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a}{}}^+{}_{a}{}^{h}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{j}{}^{a})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})`$
$`\stackrel{\text{Thm }\text{4}}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a}{}}^+{}_{a}{}^{h}\zeta _{5}^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{a})`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a,b}{}}^+{}_{a}{}^{h}_{}^{}{}_{b}{}^{i}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{}(S^{}{}_{k}{}^{b})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{a})`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.20})}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a,b}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,r,s}{}}^+{}_{a}{}^{h}_{}^{}{}_{b}{}^{i}\widehat{R}_{}^{1}{}_{lm}{}^{ba}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{A.7})}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{c,d}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,r,s}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{cd}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{m}{}^{d}_{}^{+}{}_{l}{}^{c}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{r}{}^{l})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{c,d}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m,r,s}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{cd}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{m}{}^{d}\zeta _{5}^{+}(^+{}_{r}{}^{c})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`\stackrel{\text{Thm }\text{4}}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{c,d}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m,r,s}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{cd}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{m}{}^{d}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{c})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}`$ $`\text{rhs}(\text{5.23}).`$
For even $`N`$

$`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{h})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{b}{}}^+{}_{b}{}^{h}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{j}{}^{b})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})`$
$`\stackrel{\text{Thm }\text{4},(\text{5.17})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{b}{}}^+{}_{b}{}^{h}\zeta _{5}^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{b})q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{a,b}{}}^+{}_{b}{}^{h}_{}^{}{}_{a}{}^{i}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{}(S^{}{}_{k}{}^{a})\phi ^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{b})q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{A.7})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{a,b}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,c,d}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{m}_{}^{+}{}_{c}{}^{l}\widehat{R}_{ab}^{cd}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{k}{}^{a})\phi ^+(S^+{}_{j}{}^{b})q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}.`$
If $`k\{1,1\}`$ then

$`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{h})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{(\text{5.21})}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,c,d}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{m}_{}^{+}{}_{c}{}^{l}[{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r,s}{s\pm 1}}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{r}{}^{c})`$
$`\times \stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r,s}{s=\pm 1}}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^+(S^+{}_{r}{}^{c})\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^2]q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,d,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{m}\zeta _{5}^{+}(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^2]q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}`$
$`\stackrel{\text{Thm }\text{4},(\text{5.17})}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,d,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{m}[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^{2+\eta _s(\eta _r\eta _l)}]\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _k}{\overline{\gamma }_k}}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}+`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^{2+\eta _s(\eta _r\eta _l)}]\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}`$
$`\stackrel{\text{Thm }\text{4}}{=}\text{rhs}(\text{5.24}).`$
If $`k\{1,1\}`$ then

$`\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{j}{}^{h})\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{k}{}^{i})\stackrel{(\text{5.21})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{l,m,c}{d,r}}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{m}_{}^{+}{}_{c}{}^{l}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}^{+}(S^+{}_{r}{}^{c})[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}+{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s}{s=\pm 1}}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{kj}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^2]q^{\eta _j(\eta _i\eta _k)}{\displaystyle \frac{p^k}{p^k}}q^{2+2\eta _j\eta _k}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,d,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{m}\zeta _{5}^{+}(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d})\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^2]q^{2+\eta _j(\eta _i+\eta _k)}{\displaystyle \frac{p^k}{p^k}}`$
$`\stackrel{\text{Thm }\text{4},(\text{5.17})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}_{}^{}{}_{d}{}^{m}[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d})\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{~}{\phi }^{}(S^{}{}_{s}{}^{d}){\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^{2+\eta _s(\eta _r\eta _l)}]\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})q^{2+\eta _j(\eta _i+\eta _k)}{\displaystyle \frac{p^k}{p^k}}`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{5.13})}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{l,m,r}{}}\widehat{R}^1{}_{lm}{}^{ih}[{\displaystyle \underset{s\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}+{\displaystyle \underset{s=\pm 1}{}}\zeta _5^{}(^{}{}_{s}{}^{m})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{p^s}{p^s}}\widehat{R}_{k,j}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\gamma }_s}{\gamma _s}}q^{2+\eta _s(\eta _r\eta _l)}]\zeta _5^+(^+{}_{r}{}^{l})q^{2+\eta _j(\eta _i+\eta _k)}{\displaystyle \frac{p^k}{p^k}}`$
$`\stackrel{\text{Thm }\text{4}}{=}\text{rhs}(\text{5.25}).`$