1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Semi-Simple Lie Algebra Representations

  1. Oct 29, 2007 #1
    I'm trying to prove that any representation of a semisimple Lie algebra can be uniquely decomposed into irreducible representations.

    I have seen some sketches of proofs that show that any representation [tex] \phi [/tex] of a semisimple Lie algebra which acts on a finite-dimensional complex vector space [tex] V [/tex] is completely reducible (i.e. [tex] V = V_1 \oplus V_2 \oplus \cdots \oplus V_k [/tex], such that the restriction of [tex] \phi [/tex] to each [tex] V_i [/tex] is irreducible). But how do we know that this decomposition is unique?
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2007
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 29, 2007 #2

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    You show that in two decompositions

    [tex]V\cong \oplus V_i \cong W_j[/tex]

    that one of the summands V_r is isomorphic to one W_s, wlog V_1 and W_1, then use induction on V/V_1.
     
  4. Oct 29, 2007 #3
    question

    So two representations [tex] \phi [/tex] and [tex] \phi ' [/tex] for [tex] \mathfrak{g} [/tex] are said to be equivalent if there is an isomorphism [tex] E [/tex] between the underlying vector spaces such that [tex] E \phi (X) = \phi' (X) E [/tex], [tex] \forall X \in \mathfrak{g} [/tex]. How do we know that the restriction of a representation to a given [tex] V_i [/tex] above is equivalent to a restriction of that representation to a given [tex] W_i [/tex]?
    Note that, by irreducible, I mean a vector space with no invariant subspaces under the given representation (except zero and itself).
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2007
  5. Oct 30, 2007 #4

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    The identity map on V restricts to the identity map on V_1. This must then factor through one of the W_i, wlog W_1, hence V_1 is isomorphic to W_1.
     
  6. Oct 31, 2007 #5
    Could you be a little more explicit?
    Note that I'm trying to prove this for an arbitrary representation.
     
  7. Oct 31, 2007 #6

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I know what you're trying to do; I was explicit; where do you see me do something not for an arbitrary representation? You want to show that V_1 is isomorphic to W_1 (after reordering the indices of the W_i). That is what I did.

    1. You want to find an isomrphism from V_1 to W_1, that is maps f,g such that gf= Id on V_1 and fg=Id on W_1. That is the definition of isomorphism.

    2. Consider Id on V. This maps \oplus V_i to \oplus W_j, and back again.

    3. Look at V_1 mapping under Id to \oplus W_j.

    4. The image must lie in at least one of the W_j. WLOG W_1.

    5. So we have a map, Id restricted to V_1, call it f, that maps to W_1.

    6. Call Id restricted to W_1 g.

    7. What is gf? It is Id on V_1.

    I really can't be any more explicit. In fact that is precisely what I wrote before.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Semi-Simple Lie Algebra Representations
Loading...