Corrigenda to Chapter 11 K. Iohara and Y. Koga August 31, 2011 1 Step VI For Lemma 11.10 of [IK], the proof given there in Case B with ?0 = 1 does not work and requires the following modifications. 1. Lemma 11.10.2 should be modified as follows: Case B: Suppose that (c, h) = (c[m], h?0,?0 [m]). Then (?0, ?0) ? B(m) ?? { m > ?0 + ?0 ? 1 if ?0 > 1, m ≥ 2 if ?0 = 1. For its proof, 2. Modify the sentence just after (11.14) in pp. 389 as follows: Furthermore, for ?0 > 1, by Figure 11.4 and (11.14), we have 3. Before the sentence ‘Since m ≥ 2, we obtain the conclusion.', insert the next sentence: For ?0 = 1, there is nothing to prove since this is our assumption (cf. Step III). 4. After the end of the proof of Lemma 11.10, insert For Case B and ?0 = 1, we have Lemma 11.10 12 If m < ?0 + 1, then (·|·)c,h is not positive semi-definite. Proof. Since the lemma is clear for ?0 = 1, we may assume that ?0 > 1.
- virasoro algebra
- dimensional lie
- sentence
- implies propo- sition
- representation theory
- world sci
- ?0 ?