### November 27, 2006

CERN-PH-TH/2005-006 .
<ph f="cmbx">Lorentzian homogeneous spaces admitting a homogeneous structure of type </ph> <math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <msub> <mrow> <mo mathvariant="script">T</mo> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>⊕</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mo mathvariant="script">T</mo> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>3</mn> </mrow> </msub> </math>

### Patrick Meessen

(PM) Physics Department, Theory, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland E-mail address : Patrick.Meessen@cern.ch
• Abstract. We show that a Lorentzian homogeneous space admitting a homogeneous structure of type ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  is either a (locally) symmetric space or a singular homogeneous plane wave.
A theorem by Ambrose and Singer [1, generalized to arbitrary signature in [2, states that on a reductive homogeneous space, there exists a metric-compatible connection $\overline{\nabla }=\nabla -S$  , with $\nabla$  the Levi-Cività connection, that parallelizes the Riemann tensor $R$  , and the $\left(1,2\right)$  -tensor $S$  , i.e. $\overline{\nabla }g=\overline{\nabla }R=\overline{\nabla }S=0$  . Since a $\left(1,2\right)$  -tensor in $D\ge 3$  decomposes into 3 irreps of $\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(D\right)$  , one can classify the reductive homogeneous spaces by the occurrence of one of these irreps in the tensor $S$  [3, 4. This leads to 8 different classes, which range from the maximal, denoted ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{2}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  , to the minimal $\left\{0\right\}$  . Clearly homogeneous spaces of type $\left\{0\right\}$  are just symmetric spaces. Moreover, also the homogeneous spaces admitting a homogeneous structure of type ${\mathcal{T}}_{i}$  ( $i=1,2$  or $3$  ) have been characterized. For the case at hand it is worth knowing that the homogeneous spaces with a ${\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  structure, for which $S$  corresponds to a 3-form, are naturally reductive spaces [3, 4and that strictly Riemannian homogeneous ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}$  spaces are symmetric spaces [3.
Since a homogeneous structure of type ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}$  is defined by an invariant vector field, denoted by $\xi$  , one must distinguish between two cases in the Lorentz setting: the non-degenerate case, for which $\xi$  is a spaceor time-like vector, and the degenerate case, when $\xi$  is a null vector. In the former case, Gadea and Oubin͂a [4proved that, analogously to the strictly Riemannian case, the space is symmetric. In the degenerate case, Montesinos Amilibia [5showed that a Lorentzian homogeneous space admitting a degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}$  structure is a time-independent singular homogeneous plane wave [6. A small calculation shows that a generic, i.e. time-dependent, singular homogeneous plane wave admits a degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  structure, see e.g.
Appendix  A . (By a (non-)degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  structure, we mean that the vector field $\xi$  characterizing the ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}$  contribution has (non-)vanishing norm.) This then automatically leads to the question of whether the singular homogeneous plane waves exhaust the degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  class. As we will see, this is actually the case.
In the ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  case the homogeneous structure is given by [3
${\overline{\nabla }}_{X}Y-{\nabla }_{X}Y=-{S}_{X}Y=-{T}_{X}Y-g\left(X,Y\right)\xi +\alpha \left(Y\right)X,$
where we have defined $\alpha \left(X\right)=g\left(\xi ,X\right)$  , and ${T}_{X}Y\left(=-{T}_{Y}X\right)$  is the ${\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  contribution.
Since the metric and $S$  are parallel under $\overline{\nabla }$  , and $\xi$  is the contraction of $S$  , it follows that $\overline{\nabla }\xi =0$  or, written differently:
${\nabla }_{X}\xi ={T}_{X}\xi +\alpha \left(X\right)\xi -\alpha \left(\xi \right)X.$
This equation, together with the fact that $T$  is a 3-form, implies that ${\nabla }_{\xi }\xi =0$  , i.e. $\xi$  is a geodesic vector.
Given an isometry algebra $\mathfrak{g}$  of a Lie group acting transitively on a given homogeneous space, with a reductive split $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{m}+\mathfrak{h}$  , where $\mathfrak{h}\subseteq \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(1,n+1\right)$  is the isotropy subalgebra, it is possible, and usually done, to identify $\mathfrak{m}$  with ${\mathbb{R}}^{1,n+1}$  ; the action of $\mathfrak{h}$  on $\mathfrak{m}$  can then be given by the vector representation of $\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(1,n+1\right)$  [7. This identification enables one to express the algebra in terms of $S$  and the curvature $\overline{R}$  as, limiting ourselves to the $\mathfrak{m}×\mathfrak{m}$  commutator,
 $\begin{array}{c}\left[X,Y\right]={S}_{X}Y-{S}_{Y}X+\overline{R}\left(X,Y\right),\end{array}$ (1)
where $S$  and $\overline{R}$  are evaluated at some point $p$  . In the above formula, $\overline{R}$  signals the presence of $\mathfrak{h}$  in $\left[\mathfrak{m},\mathfrak{m}\right]$  . From now on, we only consider this Lie algebra and all the relevant tensor fields are evaluated at a specific point, even though this is not stated explicitly.
Up to this point not too much has been said about $\mathfrak{h}$  , and in fact not too much can be said. It is known, however [7, that a tensor field parallelized by $\overline{\nabla }$  , when evaluated at a point corresponds to an $\mathfrak{h}$  -invariant tensor. Since in this article we take $\xi$  (a $\mathfrak{h}$  -invariant vector field as $\overline{\nabla }\xi =0$  ) to be non-vanishing, this means that $\mathfrak{h}\subseteq \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(n+1\right)$  when $\xi$  is light-like, $\mathfrak{h}\subseteq \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(1,n\right)$  when $\xi$  is space-like, and $\mathfrak{h}\subseteq \mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(n\right)$  when $\xi$  is null.
Let us briefly outline the manner in which we arrive at our conclusion: given a reductive homogeneous space with reductive split $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{m}+\mathfrak{h}$  , the subalgebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\prime }=\mathfrak{m}+\left[\mathfrak{m},\mathfrak{m}\right]=\mathfrak{m}+{\mathfrak{h}}^{\prime }$  is an ideal of $\mathfrak{g}$  . It is this ideal, which is the Lie algebra of a Lie group still acting transitively, that we will consider; we will say that an element of $\mathfrak{h}$  appears in the algebra if it is an element of ${\mathfrak{h}}^{\prime }$  . Given the homogeneous structure, we can then, following Eq. ( 1 ), write down the maximal form of the algebra compatible with the homogeneous structure. Since we are dealing with a Lie algebra, we can then use the Jacobi identities to constrain the structure constants; after a redefinition of some generators in $\mathfrak{m}$  , corresponding to the choice of a different reductive split, this leads to a recognizable result. Since the non-degenerate case is far less involved than the degenerate case, and gives a better idea of the straightforward manipulations used, it will be discussed before the degenerate case.

1 The non-degenerate case

Let $\mathfrak{m}$  be spanned by the generators $V$  and ${Z}_{i}$  ( $i=1,\dots ,n$  ), which in this case we can take to satisfy
 $\begin{array}{ccccccc}〈V,V〉& =& \aleph & ,& \alpha \left(V\right)& =& \lambda =\aleph |\lambda |,\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccccccc}〈{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}〉& =& {\eta }_{ij}& ,& \alpha \left({Z}_{i}\right)& =& 0,\end{array}$
where $\aleph =±1$  distinguishes between the time-like (for $\aleph =-1$  ) and the space-like (for $\aleph =1$  ) cases and $\eta =\mathit{d}iag\left(-\aleph ,1,\dots ,1\right)$  . As is mentioned in the introduction, $\mathfrak{h}$  is either contained in $\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(n+1\right)$  ( $\aleph =-1$  ) or $\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(1,n\right)$  ( $\aleph =1$  ) and the relevant non-vanishing commutation relations are
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{M}_{ij},{M}_{kl}\right]& =& {\eta }_{jk}{M}_{il}-{\eta }_{ik}{M}_{jl}+{\eta }_{jl}{M}_{ki}-{\eta }_{il}{M}_{kj},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{M}_{ij},{Z}_{k}\right]& =& {\eta }_{jk}{Z}_{i}-{\eta }_{ik}{Z}_{j}.\end{array}$
Once again, let us stress that not every $M$  needs appear, but the elements of ${\mathfrak{h}}^{\prime }$  can be written as combinations of the $M$  's, and their commutation relations are induced by the ones above.
With respect to the chosen basis we can decompose $2{T}_{V}{Z}_{i}={{F}_{i}}^{j}{Z}_{j}$  and $2{T}_{{Z}_{i}}{Z}_{j}=\aleph {F}_{ij}V+{{C}_{ij}}^{k}{Z}_{k}$  , which allows us to write
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[V,{Z}_{i}\right]& =& \lambda {Z}_{i}+{{F}_{i}}^{j}{Z}_{j}+\overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right),\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right]& =& \aleph {F}_{ij}V+{{C}_{ij}}^{k}{Z}_{k}+\overline{R}\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right).\end{array}$
Let us then, following the strategy outlined above, check the Jacobi identities.
The first one is the $\left(V,{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right)$  identity, which leads to $F=0$  and
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{\lambda }{2}{C}_{ijk}& =& {R}_{jik}-{R}_{ijk}\end{array}$ (2)
 $\begin{array}{ccc}2\lambda {{S}_{ij}}^{mn}& =& {{C}_{ij}}^{k}{{R}_{k}}^{mn},\end{array}$ (3)
where we expanded $\overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right)={{R}_{i}}^{mn}{M}_{mn}$  and $\overline{R}\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right)={{S}_{ij}}^{mn}{M}_{mn}$  . Since $F=0$  we can redefine
${Y}_{i}={Z}_{i}+{\lambda }^{-1}{{R}_{i}}^{mn}{M}_{mn},$
from which we trivially find
$\left[V,{Y}_{i}\right]=\lambda {Y}_{i},$
which at once implies that $C=0$  , by Eq. ( 2 ), and also that $S=0$  thanks to Eq. ( 3 ). So the, quite remarkable, result is that a Lorentzian homogeneous space admitting a non-degenerate homogeneous structure of type ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  , also admits a non-degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}$  structure. Combining this with the results of Gadea and Oubin͂a [4, we have proven that:
Proposition 1. A connected Lorentzian homogeneous space admitting a non-degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  structure is a (locally) symmetric space.

2 The degenerate case

In the degenerate case we can choose the generators $U$  , $V$  and ${Z}_{i}$  ( $i=1,\dots ,n$  ) spanning $\mathfrak{m}$  such that $\alpha \left(U\right)=\lambda \ne 0$  , $\alpha \left(V\right)=\alpha \left({Z}_{i}\right)=0$  . The invariant norm is then $〈U,V〉=1$  and $〈{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}〉={\delta }_{ij}$  and we decompose the ${\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  contribution to $S$  as
 $\begin{array}{ccccccc}2T\left(U,V,{Z}_{i}\right)& =& {W}_{i}& ,& 2T\left(U,{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right)& =& {F}_{ij},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccccccc}2T\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j},{Z}_{k}\right)& =& {C}_{ijk}& ,& 2T\left(V,{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right)& =& {\aleph }_{ij},\end{array}$
where $F$  , $\aleph$  and $C$  are totally antisymmetric. Given these abbreviations we can write the most general $\mathfrak{m}×\mathfrak{m}$  commutators as
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[U,V\right]& =& \lambda V+{W}^{i}{Z}_{i}+\overline{R}\left(U,V\right),\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[U,{Z}_{i}\right]& =& \lambda {Z}_{i}+{{F}_{i}}^{j}{Z}_{j}-{W}_{i}U+\overline{R}\left(U,{Z}_{i}\right),\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[V,{Z}_{i}\right]& =& {W}^{i}V+{{\aleph }_{i}}^{j}{Z}_{j}+\overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right),\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right]& =& {\aleph }_{ij}U+{F}_{ij}V+{C}_{ijk}{Z}^{k}+\overline{R}\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right),\end{array}$
where the various $\overline{R}$  need to be expanded in terms of the generators of $\mathfrak{h}$  . Since $\xi$  is null, we see that $\mathfrak{h}\subseteq \mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(n\right)$  , which we take to be spanned by ${\overline{Z}}_{i}$  and ${M}_{ij}$  with commutation relations
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{M}_{ij},{M}_{kl}\right]& =& {\delta }_{jk}{M}_{il}-{\delta }_{ik}{M}_{jl}+{\delta }_{jl}{M}_{ki}-{\delta }_{il}{M}_{kj},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{M}_{ij},{\overline{Z}}_{k}\right]& =& {\delta }_{jk}{\overline{Z}}_{i}-{\delta }_{ik}{\overline{Z}}_{j},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{M}_{ij},{Z}_{k}\right]& =& {\delta }_{jk}{Z}_{i}-{\delta }_{ik}{Z}_{j},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[U,{\overline{Z}}_{i}\right]& =& {Z}_{i},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{Z}_{i},{\overline{Z}}_{j}\right]& =& -{\delta }_{ij}V,\end{array}$
where it should be kept in mind that not all elements of $\mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(n\right)$  need appear.
We can then once again start to recover the information contained in the Jacobi identities: the $\left(U,V,Z\right)$  Jacobi identity reads
 $\begin{array}{ccc}0& =& -2\lambda {W}_{i}V-\left\{\lambda {\aleph }_{ij}+{{F}_{i}}^{k}{\aleph }_{kj}+{{F}_{j}}^{k}{\aleph }_{ik}+{W}^{k}{C}_{kij}\right\}{Z}^{k}\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & -\left[\overline{R}\left(U,V\right),{Z}_{i}\right]-\left[\overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right),U\right]\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & +{{\aleph }_{i}}^{j}\overline{R}\left(U,{Z}_{i}\right)-2\lambda \overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right)-{{F}_{i}}^{j}\overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right)+{W}^{j}\overline{R}\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right).\end{array}$ (4)
Cancellation of the $V$  contribution then means that $\overline{R}\left(U,V\right)=-2\lambda {W}^{i}{\overline{Z}}_{i}+{Y}^{ij}{M}_{ij}$  , which at once means that $W$  can only be non-zero for those directions for which a $\overline{Z}$  appears. Specifically, should none appear, then $W=0$  . Let us then split the index $i$  into some indices $a$  and $I$  , such that the ${\overline{Z}}_{a}$  do appear whereas the ${\overline{Z}}_{I}$  do not.
Having made the split, we can investigate the implication of having the null-boosts in the algebra. Let us start by looking at the $\left(U,{Z}_{i},{\overline{Z}}_{a}\right)$  Jacobi: a small calculation then shows that this implies
 $\begin{array}{ccc}0& =& -{\aleph }_{ia}U-{\delta }_{ia}{W}^{i}{Z}_{i}+{W}_{i}{Z}_{a}+{C}_{aik}{Z}^{k}\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & -\left[\overline{R}\left(U,{Z}_{i}\right),{\overline{Z}}_{a}\right]-{\delta }_{ia}\overline{R}\left(U,V\right)-\overline{R}\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{a}\right).\end{array}$
In order for the above to be true we must have that ${\aleph }_{ai}={C}_{aij}=0$  and that $W$  can be non-zero only if no or only one $\overline{Z}$  appears in $\mathfrak{h}$  . As was said above, the no-case already implies that $W=0$  , so we had better have a look at the case of one appearing null boost. For this we are helped by the $\mathfrak{h}$  -part of the above equation. Clearly in the case when we are dealing with only one $\overline{Z}$  , this amounts to the statement that $\left[\overline{R}\left(U,{Z}_{a}\right),{\overline{Z}}_{a}\right]=-\overline{R}\left(U,V\right)$  , which, since there is no rotation in $\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{o}\left(n\right)$  that can take ${Z}_{a}$  to ${Z}_{a}$  , means that $\overline{R}\left(U,V\right)=0$  , and hence that ${W}_{a}=0$  .
This then means that in all cases we have $W=0$  .
Continuing with the analysis, one can see that the $\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j},{\overline{Z}}_{a}\right)$  Jacobi leads to
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{\aleph }_{ij}{Z}_{a}& =& {\delta }_{ja}{{\aleph }_{i}}^{k}{Z}_{k}-{\delta }_{ia}{{\aleph }_{j}}^{k}{Z}_{k},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[\overline{R}\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right),{\overline{Z}}_{a}\right]& =& {\delta }_{ja}\overline{R}\left(U,{Z}_{i}\right)-{\delta }_{ia}\overline{R}\left(U,{Z}_{j}\right).\end{array}$
Then, using the fact that ${\aleph }_{ia}=0$  , one then sees that ${\aleph }_{IJ}=0$  and that hence ${\aleph }_{ij}=0$  when $\mathfrak{h}$  includes some null boost. In the case when there is no $\overline{Z}$  , the relevant information can be obtained by picking out the $V$  component in the $\left(V,{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right)$  Jacobi: this implies that $\lambda {\aleph }_{ij}={{F}_{i}}^{k}{\aleph }_{kj}+{{F}_{j}}^{k}{\aleph }_{ik}$  , which after contraction leads to $\lambda {\aleph }_{ij}{\aleph }^{ij}=0$  and thus implies that $\aleph =0$  .
The $\mathfrak{h}$  -part of Eq. ( 4 ) then implies that $2\lambda \overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right)=-{{F}_{i}}^{j}\overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{j}\right)$  , so that $\overline{R}\left(V,{Z}_{i}\right)=0$  . In order to then identically satisfy Eq. ( 4 ) we must have $\left[\overline{R}\left(U,V\right),{Z}_{i}\right]=0$  , so that $\overline{R}\left(U,V\right)=0$  .
Summarizing the results obtained thus far, we find that the non-trivial $\mathfrak{m}×\mathfrak{m}$  -commutators, scaling $U$  in such a way that $\lambda =1$  and decomposing the various $\overline{R}$  's, are
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[U,V\right]& =& V,\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[U,{Z}_{i}\right]& =& {\left(F+\delta \right)}_{ij}{Z}_{j}+{h}_{ij}{\overline{Z}}_{j}+\frac{1}{2}{R}_{ijk}{M}_{jk},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right]& =& {F}_{ij}V+{C}_{ijk}{Z}_{k}+{S}_{ijk}{\overline{Z}}_{k}+{N}_{ijkl}{M}_{kl}.\end{array}$
Let us then continue our analysis of the Jacobi identities: the $\left(U,{Z}_{i},{Z}_{j}\right)$  Jacobi implies
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{h}_{ij}& =& {A}_{\left(ij\right)}-\frac{1}{2}{F}_{ij},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{C}_{ijk}{h}_{kl}& =& {\left(F+\delta \right)}_{ik}{S}_{kjl}+{\left(F+\delta \right)}_{jk}{S}_{ikl},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{2}{C}_{ijk}{R}_{kmn}& =& {\left(F+\delta \right)}_{ik}{N}_{kjmn}+{\left(F+\delta \right)}_{jk}{N}_{ikmn},\end{array}$ (5)
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{S}_{ijk}+{R}_{ijk}-{R}_{jik}& =& {\delta }_{F}{C}_{ijk}+{C}_{ijk},\end{array}$ (6)
where we defined
${\delta }_{F}{C}_{ijk}={F}_{il}{C}_{ljk}+{F}_{jl}{C}_{ilk}+{F}_{kl}{C}_{ijl}.$
From Eq. ( 6 ) one sees that $S$  must be totally antisymmetric. Denoting by ${\mathfrak{S}}_{\left(ijk\right)}$  the sum over the permutations $\left(ijk\right)$  , $\left(jki\right)$  and $\left(kij\right)$  , the $\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j},{Z}_{k}\right)$  Jacobi results in
 $\begin{array}{ccc}0& =& {\mathfrak{S}}_{\left(ijk\right)}{C}_{jkl}{S}_{ilm},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}0& =& {\mathfrak{S}}_{\left(ijk\right)}{C}_{jkl}{N}_{ilmn},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}0& =& {\mathfrak{S}}_{\left(ijk\right)}\left[{C}_{jkl}{C}_{ilm}+2{N}_{jkim}\right],\end{array}$
and also, since $S$  is totally antisymmetric,
 $\begin{array}{c}3S={\delta }_{F}C.\end{array}$ (7)
Of course, if a ${\overline{Z}}_{a}$  occurs in $\left[\mathfrak{m},\mathfrak{m}\right]$  , then the $\left(U,{Z}_{i},{\overline{Z}}_{a}\right)$  Jacobi implies that
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{C}_{iaj}& =& 0,\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{S}_{iaj}& =& {R}_{iaj},\end{array}$ (8)
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{N}_{iakl}& =& 0.\end{array}$ (9)
Let us then, as before, split the indices $i$  into $\left(a,I\right)$  , where the ${\overline{Z}}_{a}$  's occur but the ${\overline{Z}}_{I}$  's do not. This means by assumption that ${h}_{iI}=0$  , which implies $2{A}_{aI}={F}_{aI}$  , ${A}_{IJ}=0={F}_{IJ}$  and ${S}_{ijI}=0$  , which implies that only ${S}_{abc}$  is non-zero. Furthermore, we then see that only ${C}_{IJK}$  is non-vanishing. Together with Eq. ( 7 ), this then implies that $S=0$  , and we get the extra constraint
 $\begin{array}{c}{F}_{aI}{C}_{IJK}=0.\end{array}$ (10)
This last constraint also follows from the $\left({Z}_{i},{Z}_{j},{\overline{Z}}_{a}\right)$  Jacobi, which also tells us that ${N}_{ijal}=0$  .
Eq. ( 8 ) then implies that only ${R}_{IJK}$  and ${R}_{aJK}$  are non-vanishing, and from Eq. ( 9 ) we find that only ${N}_{IJmn}$  can be non-zero. We can calculate ${R}_{aJK}$  from Eq. ( 6 ), which then gives ${R}_{aIJ}={F}_{aK}{C}_{KIJ}=0$  because of Eq. ( 10 ). The same equation then states ${R}_{IJK}-{R}_{JIK}={C}_{IJK}$  , which by means of Eq. ( 5 ) then also implies that only the ${N}_{IJKL}$  can be non-vanishing.
Let us define the generator
${Y}_{I}={Z}_{I}-{F}_{Ia}{\overline{Z}}_{a},$
from which we can then derive that the algebra takes on the form
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[U,{Z}_{a}\right]& =& {\left(F+\delta \right)}_{ab}{Z}_{b}+\left({A}_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}{F}_{ab}\right){\overline{Z}}_{b},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{Z}_{a},{Z}_{b}\right]& =& {F}_{ab}V,\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[U,{Y}_{I}\right]& =& {Y}_{I}+\frac{1}{2}{R}_{IJK}{M}_{JK},\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}\left[{Y}_{I},{Y}_{J}\right]& =& {C}_{IJK}{Y}_{K}+{N}_{IJKL}{M}_{KL},\end{array}$
so that the $a$  and the $I$  -sectors decouple from each other.
Restricting ourselves to the $I$  -sector and further defining
${W}_{I}={Y}_{I}+\frac{1}{2}{R}_{IJK}{M}_{JK},$
we immediately find $\left[U,{W}_{I}\right]={W}_{I}$  ; calculating the remaining commutator, we find
$\left[{W}_{I},{W}_{J}\right]=\left({C}_{IJK}-{R}_{IJK}+{R}_{JIK}\right){Y}_{K}+\dots ,$
where the $\dots$  stands for terms in ${M}_{JK}$  . Using now Eq. ( 6 ), we see that this redefinition trivializes $C$  , and by way of Eq. ( 5 ), also $N$  .
At this point, the only difference between the algebra we deduced and the generic singular homogeneous plane-wave algebra in Eq. ( 11 ) are the null boosts in the $I$  -sector, that is a generator one would call ${\overline{W}}_{I}$  . It is, however, always possible to extend our algebra to an algebra that does contain them; in fact this follows immediately from the consistency of the singular homogeneous plane-wave algebra. Putting everything together, one sees that we obtain the isometry algebra of a generic singular homogeneous plane-wave in Eq. ( 11 ) by, basically, choosing a different reductive split of the same algebra. Thus we have proven that
Theorem 2. The underlying geometry of a Lorentzian homogeneous space that admits a degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  structure is that of a singular homogeneous plane wave.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank J. Figueroa-O'Farrill, R. Hernández and S. Philip for very useful discussions, and S. Vascotto for improving the readability of the text.

A Singular homogeneous plane waves

A global coordinate system for the singular homogeneous plane waves is defined by the data1
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{e}^{+}& =& dz,\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{e}^{-}& =& ds+\left[{\stackrel{⃗}{x}}^{T}{e}^{zF}H{e}^{-zF}\stackrel{⃗}{x}+s\right]dz,\end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}& & \end{array}$
 $\begin{array}{ccc}{e}^{i}& =& d{x}^{i},\end{array}$
where the metric is defined by ${\eta }_{+-}=1$  and ${\eta }_{ij}={\delta }_{ij}$  . This class of metrics admits a homogeneous structure given by the components
${S}_{++-}=-1,{S}_{+ij}={F}_{ij},{S}_{i+j}=-{\delta }_{ij}-{F}_{ij},$
which corresponds to a degenerate ${\mathcal{T}}_{1}\oplus {\mathcal{T}}_{3}$  structure.
The isometry algebra, apart from possible rotations that appear as automorphisms of the algebra, can be found to be [6
 $\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{ccccccc}\left[U,V\right]& =& V& ,& \left[{\overline{X}}_{i},{\overline{X}}_{j}\right]& =& 0\\ & & & & & & \\ \left[{X}_{i},{X}_{j}\right]& =& 2{F}_{ij}V& ,& \left[{X}_{i},{\overline{X}}_{j}\right]& =& -{\delta }_{ij}V\\ & & & & & & \\ \left[U,{\overline{X}}_{i}\right]& =& {X}_{i}& ,& \left[U,{X}_{i}\right]& =& {\left[2H-F\right]}_{ij}{\overline{X}}_{j}+{\left[\delta +2F\right]}_{ij}{X}_{j}.\end{array}\end{array}$ (11)
References

1. W. Ambrose, I. Singer: “On homogeneous Riemannian manifolds”, Duke Math. J. 25 (1958), 647–669.
2. P. Gadea, J. Oubin͂a: “Homogeneous pseudo-Riemannian structures and homogeneous almost para-Hermitean structures”, Houston J. Math. 18 (1992), 449–465.
3. F. Tricerri, L. Vanhecke: “Homogeneous structures on Riemannian manifolds”, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 83 (1983), 1–125.
4. P. Gadea, J. Oubin͂a: “Reductive homogeneous pseudo-Riemannian manifolds”, Monatsh. Math. 124 (1997), 17–34.
5. A. Montesinos Amilibia: “Degenerate homogeneous structures of type ${\mathcal{S}}_{1}$  on pseudo-Riemannian manifolds”, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 31 (2001), 561–579.
6. M. Blau, M. O'Loughlin: “Homogeneous plane waves”, Nuclear Phys. B 654 (2003), 135–176.
7. S. Kobayashi, K. Nomizu, “Foundations of differential geometry”, Wiley (1963 and 1969).

(PM) Physics Department, Theory, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland E-mail address : Patrick.Meessen@cern.ch

1 This form of the metric is related to the one in [6,Eq. (2.51)by the transformations ${x}^{+}={e}^{-z}$  , ${x}^{-}=-{e}^{z}s$  , $\stackrel{⃗}{z}=\stackrel{⃗}{x}$  , ${A}_{0}=2H$  and $f=-F$  .