matt grime said:
Let's try a third way.
What is a representation of a lie algebra space? Let V be a vector space. A rep is a map from LxV to V satisfying certain rules. I hope you're used to this notation. Since L is itself a vector space there is nothing to stop us using that as V, and the map sends (x,y) to ad(x)y=[x,y].
I am learning, so thanks.
(btw, I meant su(2), not SU(2))
My problem I think arises because I am trying to translate what you are saying to an explicit representation in terms of matrices (I don't know when to correctly use the word "representation" anymore) . I do see what you are saying: there is a vector space which we take as being the Lie algebra itself. A rep is a map from L x V to V. Since [x,y] does send an element of V to V, we can take this as being a possible rep, and it's called the adjoint rep.
This makes complete sense to me as long as I leave it formal.
Now, my problem is if I try to translate this to the language of explicit matrices. They say that one must use the structure constants to build the explicit adjoint representation. These wil represent the map LxV -> V.
For sl_2(C) you gave for example [eh]=2e and so on.
All I am saying is that to me it seems that the explicit adjoint representation of that algebra will be 3x3 matrices. And now, to reproduce the different commutation relations of the group, we will have to represent
the elements e,f, h by the column vectors (1,0,0), (0,1,0), (0,0,1).
Then the map (x,y) = [x,y] wil be reproduced in that explicit representation by simply multiplying the 3x3 matrix representing x by the column vector associated to the element y.
This is what I meant in my post #8. Isn't that correct?
Thanks for your patience.
Patrick