Proving the trace of a representation is equal to zero
I'm having some trouble in beginner's representation theory and am pretty lost about this problem:
Let ($rho$, $V$) be a representation of $G$, so $rho$: $G$ $to$ $GL(V)$ is a group homomorphism. Let $H$$subset$$G$ be a normal subgroup of index 2. Suppose $V$ is $G$-irreducible, but not $H$-irreducible. Prove tr($rho$($g$))=0 for $g$$notin$$H$.
I thought about starting by saying $G/H$ is isomorphic to $C_2$, and so you could say that some character
$lambda$=
begin{cases}
1, & text{if $g in H$} \
-1, & text{if $g notin H$}
end{cases}
But I don't think this is very helpful, and I feel like this is not the way to go about the proof. Any help would be appreciated!
abstract-algebra group-theory representation-theory characters
add a comment |
I'm having some trouble in beginner's representation theory and am pretty lost about this problem:
Let ($rho$, $V$) be a representation of $G$, so $rho$: $G$ $to$ $GL(V)$ is a group homomorphism. Let $H$$subset$$G$ be a normal subgroup of index 2. Suppose $V$ is $G$-irreducible, but not $H$-irreducible. Prove tr($rho$($g$))=0 for $g$$notin$$H$.
I thought about starting by saying $G/H$ is isomorphic to $C_2$, and so you could say that some character
$lambda$=
begin{cases}
1, & text{if $g in H$} \
-1, & text{if $g notin H$}
end{cases}
But I don't think this is very helpful, and I feel like this is not the way to go about the proof. Any help would be appreciated!
abstract-algebra group-theory representation-theory characters
add a comment |
I'm having some trouble in beginner's representation theory and am pretty lost about this problem:
Let ($rho$, $V$) be a representation of $G$, so $rho$: $G$ $to$ $GL(V)$ is a group homomorphism. Let $H$$subset$$G$ be a normal subgroup of index 2. Suppose $V$ is $G$-irreducible, but not $H$-irreducible. Prove tr($rho$($g$))=0 for $g$$notin$$H$.
I thought about starting by saying $G/H$ is isomorphic to $C_2$, and so you could say that some character
$lambda$=
begin{cases}
1, & text{if $g in H$} \
-1, & text{if $g notin H$}
end{cases}
But I don't think this is very helpful, and I feel like this is not the way to go about the proof. Any help would be appreciated!
abstract-algebra group-theory representation-theory characters
I'm having some trouble in beginner's representation theory and am pretty lost about this problem:
Let ($rho$, $V$) be a representation of $G$, so $rho$: $G$ $to$ $GL(V)$ is a group homomorphism. Let $H$$subset$$G$ be a normal subgroup of index 2. Suppose $V$ is $G$-irreducible, but not $H$-irreducible. Prove tr($rho$($g$))=0 for $g$$notin$$H$.
I thought about starting by saying $G/H$ is isomorphic to $C_2$, and so you could say that some character
$lambda$=
begin{cases}
1, & text{if $g in H$} \
-1, & text{if $g notin H$}
end{cases}
But I don't think this is very helpful, and I feel like this is not the way to go about the proof. Any help would be appreciated!
abstract-algebra group-theory representation-theory characters
abstract-algebra group-theory representation-theory characters
edited Dec 9 '18 at 21:07
André 3000
12.4k22042
12.4k22042
asked Dec 9 '18 at 20:08
empmoth
133
133
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Let $chi$ be the character of $rho$.
From orthogonality of characters,
$$sum_{gin G}|chi(g)|^2=|G|$$
since $rho$ is irreducible on $G$, and
$$sum_{gin H}|chi(g)|^2=m|H|=frac m2|G|$$
where $mge2$ is an integer,
since $rho$ is reducible on $H$.
Then $|G|gefrac m2 |G|$, so $m=2$ and we have
$$sum_{gnotin H}|chi(g)|^2=0$$
etc.
Thanks for the answer! Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can you explain a tiny bit the conclusion? Why does m=2 line mean that $sum_{gnotin H}$$lvert$$chi$($g$)$rvert$^2 = 0?
– empmoth
Dec 9 '18 at 20:54
Because $sum |chi(g)|^2$ over all $g in G$ is $|G|$ by the orthogonality relations, so if the sum over $g in H$ is $|G|$ then the sum over $g not in H$ must be 0.
– Ted
Dec 9 '18 at 22:55
You're right I can't believe I didn't see that. Thanks for the help!
– empmoth
Dec 10 '18 at 0:21
add a comment |
Here is an alternative solution that does not directly use character theory. We are told that $H$ does not act irreducibly on $V$, so let $W$ be a nonzero subspace of $V$ of smallest dimension that is invariant under the action of $H$.
Now choose $g in G setminus H$. The normality of $H$ in $G$ implies that $g(W)$ is also invariant under that action of $H$. Also, since $g^2 in H$, $g^2(W) = W$.
Now $W + g(W)$ is invariant under $G$ and so, since $G$ acts irreducibly on $V$, we have $V = W + g(W)$. Also, by minimality of $W$, we must have $W cap g(W) = {0}$, so $V = W oplus g(W)$.
Now, all elements of $G setminus H = gH$ interchange the $H$-invariant subspaces $W$ and $g(W)$ so, by choosing a basis of $V$ that consists of a union of bases of $W$ and of $g(W)$, we see that the matrices of the elements of $G setminus H$ with respect to this basis have trace $0$.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3032914%2fproving-the-trace-of-a-representation-is-equal-to-zero%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Let $chi$ be the character of $rho$.
From orthogonality of characters,
$$sum_{gin G}|chi(g)|^2=|G|$$
since $rho$ is irreducible on $G$, and
$$sum_{gin H}|chi(g)|^2=m|H|=frac m2|G|$$
where $mge2$ is an integer,
since $rho$ is reducible on $H$.
Then $|G|gefrac m2 |G|$, so $m=2$ and we have
$$sum_{gnotin H}|chi(g)|^2=0$$
etc.
Thanks for the answer! Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can you explain a tiny bit the conclusion? Why does m=2 line mean that $sum_{gnotin H}$$lvert$$chi$($g$)$rvert$^2 = 0?
– empmoth
Dec 9 '18 at 20:54
Because $sum |chi(g)|^2$ over all $g in G$ is $|G|$ by the orthogonality relations, so if the sum over $g in H$ is $|G|$ then the sum over $g not in H$ must be 0.
– Ted
Dec 9 '18 at 22:55
You're right I can't believe I didn't see that. Thanks for the help!
– empmoth
Dec 10 '18 at 0:21
add a comment |
Let $chi$ be the character of $rho$.
From orthogonality of characters,
$$sum_{gin G}|chi(g)|^2=|G|$$
since $rho$ is irreducible on $G$, and
$$sum_{gin H}|chi(g)|^2=m|H|=frac m2|G|$$
where $mge2$ is an integer,
since $rho$ is reducible on $H$.
Then $|G|gefrac m2 |G|$, so $m=2$ and we have
$$sum_{gnotin H}|chi(g)|^2=0$$
etc.
Thanks for the answer! Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can you explain a tiny bit the conclusion? Why does m=2 line mean that $sum_{gnotin H}$$lvert$$chi$($g$)$rvert$^2 = 0?
– empmoth
Dec 9 '18 at 20:54
Because $sum |chi(g)|^2$ over all $g in G$ is $|G|$ by the orthogonality relations, so if the sum over $g in H$ is $|G|$ then the sum over $g not in H$ must be 0.
– Ted
Dec 9 '18 at 22:55
You're right I can't believe I didn't see that. Thanks for the help!
– empmoth
Dec 10 '18 at 0:21
add a comment |
Let $chi$ be the character of $rho$.
From orthogonality of characters,
$$sum_{gin G}|chi(g)|^2=|G|$$
since $rho$ is irreducible on $G$, and
$$sum_{gin H}|chi(g)|^2=m|H|=frac m2|G|$$
where $mge2$ is an integer,
since $rho$ is reducible on $H$.
Then $|G|gefrac m2 |G|$, so $m=2$ and we have
$$sum_{gnotin H}|chi(g)|^2=0$$
etc.
Let $chi$ be the character of $rho$.
From orthogonality of characters,
$$sum_{gin G}|chi(g)|^2=|G|$$
since $rho$ is irreducible on $G$, and
$$sum_{gin H}|chi(g)|^2=m|H|=frac m2|G|$$
where $mge2$ is an integer,
since $rho$ is reducible on $H$.
Then $|G|gefrac m2 |G|$, so $m=2$ and we have
$$sum_{gnotin H}|chi(g)|^2=0$$
etc.
answered Dec 9 '18 at 20:27
Lord Shark the Unknown
101k958132
101k958132
Thanks for the answer! Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can you explain a tiny bit the conclusion? Why does m=2 line mean that $sum_{gnotin H}$$lvert$$chi$($g$)$rvert$^2 = 0?
– empmoth
Dec 9 '18 at 20:54
Because $sum |chi(g)|^2$ over all $g in G$ is $|G|$ by the orthogonality relations, so if the sum over $g in H$ is $|G|$ then the sum over $g not in H$ must be 0.
– Ted
Dec 9 '18 at 22:55
You're right I can't believe I didn't see that. Thanks for the help!
– empmoth
Dec 10 '18 at 0:21
add a comment |
Thanks for the answer! Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can you explain a tiny bit the conclusion? Why does m=2 line mean that $sum_{gnotin H}$$lvert$$chi$($g$)$rvert$^2 = 0?
– empmoth
Dec 9 '18 at 20:54
Because $sum |chi(g)|^2$ over all $g in G$ is $|G|$ by the orthogonality relations, so if the sum over $g in H$ is $|G|$ then the sum over $g not in H$ must be 0.
– Ted
Dec 9 '18 at 22:55
You're right I can't believe I didn't see that. Thanks for the help!
– empmoth
Dec 10 '18 at 0:21
Thanks for the answer! Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can you explain a tiny bit the conclusion? Why does m=2 line mean that $sum_{gnotin H}$$lvert$$chi$($g$)$rvert$^2 = 0?
– empmoth
Dec 9 '18 at 20:54
Thanks for the answer! Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can you explain a tiny bit the conclusion? Why does m=2 line mean that $sum_{gnotin H}$$lvert$$chi$($g$)$rvert$^2 = 0?
– empmoth
Dec 9 '18 at 20:54
Because $sum |chi(g)|^2$ over all $g in G$ is $|G|$ by the orthogonality relations, so if the sum over $g in H$ is $|G|$ then the sum over $g not in H$ must be 0.
– Ted
Dec 9 '18 at 22:55
Because $sum |chi(g)|^2$ over all $g in G$ is $|G|$ by the orthogonality relations, so if the sum over $g in H$ is $|G|$ then the sum over $g not in H$ must be 0.
– Ted
Dec 9 '18 at 22:55
You're right I can't believe I didn't see that. Thanks for the help!
– empmoth
Dec 10 '18 at 0:21
You're right I can't believe I didn't see that. Thanks for the help!
– empmoth
Dec 10 '18 at 0:21
add a comment |
Here is an alternative solution that does not directly use character theory. We are told that $H$ does not act irreducibly on $V$, so let $W$ be a nonzero subspace of $V$ of smallest dimension that is invariant under the action of $H$.
Now choose $g in G setminus H$. The normality of $H$ in $G$ implies that $g(W)$ is also invariant under that action of $H$. Also, since $g^2 in H$, $g^2(W) = W$.
Now $W + g(W)$ is invariant under $G$ and so, since $G$ acts irreducibly on $V$, we have $V = W + g(W)$. Also, by minimality of $W$, we must have $W cap g(W) = {0}$, so $V = W oplus g(W)$.
Now, all elements of $G setminus H = gH$ interchange the $H$-invariant subspaces $W$ and $g(W)$ so, by choosing a basis of $V$ that consists of a union of bases of $W$ and of $g(W)$, we see that the matrices of the elements of $G setminus H$ with respect to this basis have trace $0$.
add a comment |
Here is an alternative solution that does not directly use character theory. We are told that $H$ does not act irreducibly on $V$, so let $W$ be a nonzero subspace of $V$ of smallest dimension that is invariant under the action of $H$.
Now choose $g in G setminus H$. The normality of $H$ in $G$ implies that $g(W)$ is also invariant under that action of $H$. Also, since $g^2 in H$, $g^2(W) = W$.
Now $W + g(W)$ is invariant under $G$ and so, since $G$ acts irreducibly on $V$, we have $V = W + g(W)$. Also, by minimality of $W$, we must have $W cap g(W) = {0}$, so $V = W oplus g(W)$.
Now, all elements of $G setminus H = gH$ interchange the $H$-invariant subspaces $W$ and $g(W)$ so, by choosing a basis of $V$ that consists of a union of bases of $W$ and of $g(W)$, we see that the matrices of the elements of $G setminus H$ with respect to this basis have trace $0$.
add a comment |
Here is an alternative solution that does not directly use character theory. We are told that $H$ does not act irreducibly on $V$, so let $W$ be a nonzero subspace of $V$ of smallest dimension that is invariant under the action of $H$.
Now choose $g in G setminus H$. The normality of $H$ in $G$ implies that $g(W)$ is also invariant under that action of $H$. Also, since $g^2 in H$, $g^2(W) = W$.
Now $W + g(W)$ is invariant under $G$ and so, since $G$ acts irreducibly on $V$, we have $V = W + g(W)$. Also, by minimality of $W$, we must have $W cap g(W) = {0}$, so $V = W oplus g(W)$.
Now, all elements of $G setminus H = gH$ interchange the $H$-invariant subspaces $W$ and $g(W)$ so, by choosing a basis of $V$ that consists of a union of bases of $W$ and of $g(W)$, we see that the matrices of the elements of $G setminus H$ with respect to this basis have trace $0$.
Here is an alternative solution that does not directly use character theory. We are told that $H$ does not act irreducibly on $V$, so let $W$ be a nonzero subspace of $V$ of smallest dimension that is invariant under the action of $H$.
Now choose $g in G setminus H$. The normality of $H$ in $G$ implies that $g(W)$ is also invariant under that action of $H$. Also, since $g^2 in H$, $g^2(W) = W$.
Now $W + g(W)$ is invariant under $G$ and so, since $G$ acts irreducibly on $V$, we have $V = W + g(W)$. Also, by minimality of $W$, we must have $W cap g(W) = {0}$, so $V = W oplus g(W)$.
Now, all elements of $G setminus H = gH$ interchange the $H$-invariant subspaces $W$ and $g(W)$ so, by choosing a basis of $V$ that consists of a union of bases of $W$ and of $g(W)$, we see that the matrices of the elements of $G setminus H$ with respect to this basis have trace $0$.
answered Dec 9 '18 at 21:15
Derek Holt
52.6k53570
52.6k53570
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3032914%2fproving-the-trace-of-a-representation-is-equal-to-zero%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown