Criterion for (non)decomposability of a representation?

In summary: Thanks to everyone who participated in the discussion!In summary, Schur's Lemma states that a given representation is reducible if and only if there exists a singular matrix S that commutes with all elements of the representation. If no such S exists, the representation is irreducible.
  • #1
JustMeDK
14
0
Any given representation (some matrices of some algebra) will be reducible if there exists a singular, but nonzero matrix S that commutes with all elements of the representation; conversely, if no such S exists, then the representation is irreducible. This is Schur's Lemma.

My question is: Does there exists some similar criterion for deciding whether or not a given representation is decomposable, i.e., whether or not there exists some change of basis that brings the representation on (sub)block-diagonal form?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
One way to do this is to determine the character of the given representation. Then, assuming one knows the characters of the irreducible representations, one uses orthogonality relationships to decompose the character in terms of the irreducible characters.
 
  • #3
Thanks for your reply, fzero. I am not quite certain, though, that the method you propose is of any use to me for the particular case I have at hand: the representation is not that of any group (and it seems that the Schur orthogonality relations concern representations of groups). Also, and this is perhaps being too demanding, I would appreciate something conceptually as easy as the criterion of irreducibility (but perhaps that is just not possible concerning nondecomposability?).
 
  • #4
To be a little more specific about the representation at hand: it consists of elements, NOT all of which are invertible, thus, of course, not generating any group.
 
  • #5
JustMeDK said:
To be a little more specific about the representation at hand: it consists of elements, NOT all of which are invertible, thus, of course, not generating any group.

If you exponentiate the matrices, you generate a Lie group, which would then let you use the character. I don't know if this is feasible for your application.
 
  • #6
It is perhaps an idea worth looking into, thanks.

I would prefer working at the linear level, though, for the following two reasons: 1.) I have no experience with the machinery of characters; 2.) I fear that the exponentiation and subsequent generation of a group (by obtaining closure under multiplication and taking the inverse) may turn out to be rather difficult to work with.

Generating the Lie group corresponds, I guess, at the linear level to generating from the matrices at hand a closed algebra under commutation, i.e., finding a Lie algebra. But then, of course, the machinery of characters is of no use; or am I mistaken?

Anyway, my original question remains open. Therefore,

If anyone knows of some criterion on (non)decomposability, analogous in simplicity to Schur's Lemma on (ir)reducibility, then please let me know.
 
Last edited:

1. What is the criterion for decomposability of a representation?

The criterion for decomposability of a representation is a mathematical condition that determines whether a representation, which is a mathematical mapping between abstract objects and concrete objects, can be broken down into simpler components.

2. What is the criterion for non-decomposability of a representation?

The criterion for non-decomposability of a representation is the opposite of the criterion for decomposability. It determines whether a representation cannot be broken down into simpler components and remains a single, irreducible representation.

3. How is the criterion for (non)decomposability of a representation used in physics?

In physics, the criterion for (non)decomposability of a representation is used to study the symmetries of physical systems. Symmetries are represented by mathematical objects called Lie groups, and the criterion helps determine whether a given representation of a Lie group can be decomposed into simpler representations, which can provide insights into the structure and behavior of the physical system.

4. Can the criterion for (non)decomposability of a representation be applied to other fields besides physics?

Yes, the criterion for (non)decomposability of a representation can be applied to other fields such as mathematics, computer science, and even social sciences. In mathematics, it is used to study the symmetries of geometric objects, while in computer science, it can help analyze the structure and behavior of algorithms. In social sciences, it has been used to model and understand complex systems such as economies and social networks.

5. What are some examples of representations that are decomposable and non-decomposable?

An example of a decomposable representation is the spin representation of a rotation group, where it can be broken down into simpler representations based on the spin quantum number. An example of a non-decomposable representation is the fundamental representation of a simple Lie group, which is irreducible and cannot be broken down into simpler components.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
897
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
932
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top