Undergrad Example of a Lie group that cannot be represented in matrix form?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on identifying examples of Lie groups that cannot be represented as matrix groups. Participants mention the adjoint representation and its implications for matrix group representation, emphasizing the need for a faithful representation. The metaplectic group is highlighted as a specific example, noted for being a double cover of the symplectic group and not simply connected. There is clarification on the distinction between the metaplectic group and its universal cover, with participants correcting misunderstandings about their properties. The conversation underscores the complexity of representing certain Lie groups in matrix form.
nrqed
Science Advisor
Messages
3,762
Reaction score
297
I am not sure if this is the right forum to post this question.
The title says it all: are there examples of Lie groups that cannot be represented as matrix groups?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here (at the beginning) is an example of a local Lie group
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/journey-manifold-su2mathbbc-part/

However, we have the adjoint representation ##\operatorname{Ad}\, : \,G\longrightarrow \operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{g})##, and ##\operatorname{Ad}(G)## is a Lie subgroup of ##\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{g})##. If it is a monomorphism, we automatically get ##\operatorname{G}\cong \operatorname{Ad}(G)## and have a matrix group.
 
  • Like
Likes nrqed
fresh_42 said:
Here (at the beginning) is an example of a local Lie group
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/journey-manifold-su2mathbbc-part/

However, we have the adjoint representation ##\operatorname{Ad}\, : \,G\longrightarrow \operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{g})##, and ##\operatorname{Ad}(G)## is a Lie subgroup of ##\operatorname{GL}(\mathfrak{g})##. If it is a monomorphism, we automatically get ##\operatorname{G}\cong \operatorname{Ad}(G)## and have a matrix group.
Your notation for the unitary groups is unconventional.
 
Last edited:
##\widetilde{SL}_2(\mathbb R)##
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby and nrqed
martinbn said:
##\widetilde{SL}_2(\mathbb R)##
Thank you. Can you tell me how it is defined, or under what name I can look up information about that group?
 
Metaplectic
 
  • Like
Likes nrqed
martinbn said:
Metaplectic
Tank you to both of you! This is what I was looking for!
 
Don't you always have a trivial representation sending everything to the identity?
 
  • #10
WWGD said:
Don't you always have a trivial representation sending everything to the identity?
I guess we want to have a faithful representation to call a group a matrix group.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
  • #11
fresh_42 said:
I guess we want to have a faithful representation to call a group a matrix group.
How about the Cayley representation then, as a group of permutations?
 
  • #12
WWGD said:
How about the Cayley representation then, as a group of permutations?
Are we still talking about Lie groups?
 
  • #13
fresh_42 said:
Are we still talking about Lie groups?
Cant every group be described as a permutation group? Unless you want to preserve any other than algebraic properties, it seems it would work, though I don't see how to do it with Lie groups.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
WWGD said:
Cant every group be described as a permutation group? Unless you want to preserve any other than algebraic properties, it seems it would work, though I don't see how to do it with Lie groups.
If the group is not finite, these permutations are not going to be matrices.
 
  • #15
martinbn said:
##\widetilde{SL}_2(\mathbb R)##

martinbn said:
Metaplectic

These groups are different. The metaplectic group ##Mp(2)## is not simply connected because it is a double cover of ##Sp(2)=SL_2(\mathbb{R}),## which has fundamental group of ##\mathbb{Z}##.
 
  • #16
Infrared said:
These groups are different. The metaplectic group ##Mp(2)## is not simply connected because it is a double cover of ##Sp(2)=SL_2(\mathbb{R}),## which has fundamental group of ##\mathbb{Z}##.
Yes, but that was clear from the link.
 
  • #17
Infrared said:
These groups are different. The metaplectic group ##Mp(2)## is not simply connected because it is a double cover of ##Sp(2)=SL_2(\mathbb{R}),## which has fundamental group of ##\mathbb{Z}##.

The tilde on top of the group "name" exactly universal cover of that group means. So the two groups are not different.
 
  • #18
dextercioby said:
The tilde on top of the group "name" exactly universal cover of that group means. So the two groups are not different.
The universal cover of a space is simply connected. The metaplectic group is not simply connected. So they are different.
 
  • Informative
Likes dextercioby
  • #19
Absolutely, it seems my memory betrays me. I stand corrected.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K