Irreducible representation of so(3)

nematic
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi guys, I have a question which is very fundamental to representation theory.
What I am wondering is that whether a first rank cartesian representation of so(3) is irreducible.
As I understand first rank cartesian representation of so(3) can be parametrized in terms of the Euler angles. That matrix representation of so(3) contains sine and cosine of the three Euler angles which are rotation matrices that transform a vector (x,y,z).
So my understanding is that representation must be irreducible because each matrix in so(3) transform a vector by rotating it around a direction. However each matrix in so(3) rotates a vector around a different vector. Therefore there is no invariant one and two dimensional subspace of so(3).
That seems to be a plausible explanation. What I think to be more solid proof is to be able to say that any similarity transformation in so(3) does not simultaneously sent all representative of so(3) into one block diagonal form.
I was wondering if it is already proved in the literature or is there any way we can prove it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A one dimensional representation is per definition irreducible, since there cannot be subspaces. It is also a trivial representation since for all ##X\in \mathfrak{g}## where ##\mathfrak{g}## is a semisimple Lie algebra, and ##\mathfrak{su}(3)## is simple, ergo semisimple, we can find ##Y,Z \in \mathfrak{g}## such that ##X=[Y,Z]##. Now we get ##X.v=[Y,Z].v=Y.Z.v-Z.Y.v=\lambda(Y)\lambda(Z).v-\lambda(Z)\lambda(Y).v=0## since every operation of ##Y## on ##v## turns ##v## into a multiple ##\lambda(Y)\cdot v## and ##\lambda## has to be a linear form.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top