Dual Representation: Why Use g^{-1}?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Pietjuh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dual Representation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the definition and implications of the dual representation in representation theory, specifically the use of the inverse element \( g^{-1} \) in the dual representation \( \rho^* \). It is established that using \( g^{-1} \) ensures the preservation of homomorphism properties, converting a left representation into a right representation while maintaining the structure of the group. The transformation \( \rho^*(g) = \rho(g^{-1})^t \) is essential for defining the action of a group on the dual space, allowing for the correct mapping of linear transformations between vector spaces.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of representation theory concepts, particularly dual representations.
  • Familiarity with linear algebra, specifically matrix transposition and linear mappings.
  • Knowledge of group theory, including the properties of homomorphisms and anti-homomorphisms.
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and operations involving vector spaces.
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the properties of dual representations in greater depth, focusing on their applications in representation theory.
  • Study the implications of anti-involution in group representations and how it affects the structure of representations.
  • Learn about the relationship between left and right representations and their transformations.
  • Investigate the role of matrix transposition in linear transformations and its impact on dual spaces.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in representation theory, linear algebra, and group theory, will benefit from this discussion. It is also valuable for students seeking to understand the intricacies of dual representations and their applications in various mathematical contexts.

Pietjuh
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
I've been starting to study some things about representation theory. I've come to the point where they introduced the dual of a representation.

Suppose that \rho is a representation on a vector space V.
They then define the dual representation \rho^* as:

\rho^*(g) = \rho(g^{-1})^t: V^* \to V^*

But the thing is that I don't see why they use g^{-1} in this definition instead of just g?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because otherwise it would not be a representation (the map would not be a homomorphism, but an anti-homomorphism, that is denoting your notional maps as f, f(gh)=f(h)f(g))
Taking duals interchanges the order of composition, ie it makes a left representation into a right representation, fortunately groups possesses this anti-involution that makes you able to correct it and turn it into a left representation again. Left means make the matrix act on the left, right means make the matrix act on the right.

Notice they *do* actually use g to define the representation p*, ie they do tell you how to work out p*(g), and it is p(g) 'inverse transpose'.

Given some representation p, there are many things that we can do to get another representation. This is just one of them, and it so happens the vector space of the representation is V*.

You shuold check that you do indeed find that the representation

f(g)=p(g) transpose

is not generically (which means 'usually', or 'except for certain cases' such as G being abelian, or p(G) being abelian) a (left) representation, ie the map f is not a group homomorphism.
 
Last edited:
matt grime said:
Taking duals interchanges the order of composition, ie it makes a left representation into a right representation, fortunately groups possesses this anti-involution that makes you able to correct it and turn it into a left representation again. Left means make the matrix act on the left, right means make the matrix act on the right.

Is this the definition of a dual map? Or is it derivable from something else?
 
Given a representation, p,V, how can you make G act on the dual space? if f is in the dual space then the *only* obvious action of G on f is to define

g.f(v)=f(g.v)
for all v in V.: remember it suffices to define a linear map by how it acts on vectors, so we defince g.f to be the linear map that sends v go f(g.v).

All this is saying is that End(V) maps to End(V*) by taking transposes. And and (AB)^T = (B^T)(A^T) which we all learned in our first lecture on dual spaces. So it's derivable just from elementary linear/quadratic maths.Let's prove it reverses the order (this is just revision but in a different notation, probably): if you do this (gh).f(v) = f((gh).v)=f(g(h.v))=g.f(h.v)=h.(g.f(v), so it naturally changes the order.

But there is a way to correct this for *group representations*, by making

g.f(v)=f(g^{-1}(v))

for all v.

The composition of inverting matrices and then transposing them swaps the composition over twice.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K