1. Jan 26, 2016 #1

   facenian

   

   if subspace A is invariant with respect to a linear operator, is it true that A is invariant with respect to the inverse operator? if not I think threre is a mistake in Wigners paper in "B. Some immediate simplifications" page 13

    

   facenian, Jan 26, 2016
2. 
   Phys.org - latest science and technology news stories on Phys.org

   • • Tuning into quantum: Scientists unlock signal frequency control of precision atom qubits
   • • Theorists publish highest-precision prediction of muon magnetic anomaly
   • • Researchers interpret new experimental data aimed at showing dark matter interacts with ordinary matter
3. Jan 26, 2016 #2

   facenian

   

   I'm sorry it's my mistake, I didn't read well. At the begining of the paragraph he says that the subspace is invariant under all lorentz transformation then it must be invariant for [itex]D(L^{-1})[/itex] too

    

   facenian, Jan 26, 2016
4. Jan 26, 2016 #3

   A. Neumaier

   

   Science Advisor

   Insights Author

   Yes, if the linear operator is invertible and maps A onto A.

    

   Last edited: Jan 26, 2016

   A. Neumaier, Jan 26, 2016
5. Jan 26, 2016 #4

   Samy_A

   

   Science Advisor

   Homework Helper

   If invariant is defined as ##T(A) \subseteq A##, then I think this isn't necessarily true in an infinite dimensional space.

    

   Samy_A, Jan 26, 2016
6. Jan 26, 2016 #5

   A. Neumaier

   

   Science Advisor

   Insights Author

   Indeed. In infinite dimensions you need to assume more. I corrected my statement accordingly.

    

   A. Neumaier, Jan 26, 2016

• Log in with Facebook
• Log in with Twitter

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in