Irreducible representation of so(3)

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nematic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Representation So(3)
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the irreducibility of the first rank Cartesian representation of the Lie algebra so(3). It is established that this representation can be parameterized using Euler angles, leading to rotation matrices that transform a vector in three-dimensional space. The conclusion is that the representation is irreducible because no invariant one- or two-dimensional subspaces exist within so(3), as each matrix corresponds to a unique rotation axis. The need for a formal proof regarding the inability to diagonalize all representations simultaneously is also highlighted.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lie algebras, specifically so(3)
  • Familiarity with representation theory concepts
  • Knowledge of rotation matrices and their properties
  • Basic understanding of Euler angles and their applications in 3D transformations
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of irreducible representations in Lie algebras
  • Study the relationship between rotation matrices and Euler angles in depth
  • Explore the concept of similarity transformations in the context of so(3)
  • Investigate existing literature on the diagonalization of representations in representation theory
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mathematicians, physicists, and students specializing in representation theory, particularly those focusing on Lie algebras and their applications in physics and geometry.

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K