1
$\begingroup$

I am trying to prove that $\vert \hat{G}\vert \leq \sum_{\phi \in \hat{G}} d_{\phi}^2 \leq \vert G \vert$ for a finite group $G$ where $\hat{G}=\{\text{inequivalent irreducible unitary representation } \phi \text{ of } G\}$. I am able to prove that $\vert \hat{G}\vert \leq \vert G \vert$. By considering the map $\alpha : \hat{G} \longrightarrow L^{2}(G)$ given by $\alpha(\phi)=\text{Trace}(\phi)$ which is well defined as trace is well defined (since similar matrices have same trace) and it is also injective by the orhogonality of the character. Let $A_{\phi}=\{\phi_{ij} : 1 \leq i,j\leq d_{\phi}\}$, and $\vert A_{\phi}\vert = d_{\phi}^2$. Now consider the map $\beta: \hat{G} \longrightarrow \cup_{\phi \in \hat{G}} A_{\phi} $ defined by $\beta(\phi)=\phi_{11}$, where $\cup_{\phi \in \hat{G}} A_{\phi}$ has finitely many elements. $\beta$ is injective by schur's orhogonality relations, but I am not able to show why $\beta$ is well defined? Is there any other map which will work? It might be a small thing but I am unable to get it. Any help in this regard would be appreciated!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What is $d_\phi$? $\endgroup$ – Sam Jaques Aug 16 '16 at 20:09
  • $\begingroup$ $d_{\phi}$ is the degree of the irreducible unitary representation $\phi : G \longrightarrow GL(V) $ which is defined to be the dimension of the complex vector space $V$. $\endgroup$ – Shubham Namdeo Aug 17 '16 at 4:03
  • $\begingroup$ Okay, I'm pretty sure $\sum_{\phi\in\hat{G}}d_\phi^2=\vert G\vert$, from which the inequality is straightforward. Have you seen a proof of that? Were you looking for a more direct proof? $\endgroup$ – Sam Jaques Aug 18 '16 at 13:55
  • $\begingroup$ Actually, I am trying to prove the fact which you stated, and I need the well-definedness of the map $\beta$, to conclude the result. All the other remaining details I have verified. $\endgroup$ – Shubham Namdeo Aug 19 '16 at 14:50
1
$\begingroup$

The proof I've seen (in "Erdos-Ko-Rado Theorems: Algebraic Approaches" by Godsil and Meagher) is to look at the left-regular representation $\Lambda:G\rightarrow GL(L(G))$, where $L(G)$ is the set of all complex functions on $G$. The action is, for $\phi\in L(G)$ and $g,x\in G$, that $$(\Lambda(g)\phi)(x)=\phi(g^{-1}x)$$ In other words, $\Lambda(\phi)=\phi'$, where $\phi'$ is a new function such that $\phi'(x)=\phi(g^{-1}x)$ (you can check that it's a representation).

Then we take functions $\delta_g\in L(G)$, defined as $\delta_g(g)=1$, $\delta_g(x)=0$ if $x\neq g$. These form a basis for $L(G)$, and we note that $(\Lambda(a)\delta_g)(x)=\delta_g(a^{-1}x)=\delta_{ag}$. Then if we define $\lambda(g)=Tr(\Lambda(g))$: $$\lambda(a)=\sum_{g\in G}\langle \delta_g,\Lambda(a)\delta_g\rangle=\sum_{g\in G}\langle \delta_g,\delta_{ag}\rangle$$ And the terms in the sum are only non-zero if $ag=g$, so it's only non-zero if $a=e$. Thus we have that $\lambda(e)=\vert G\vert$, and $\lambda(x)=0$ for $x\neq e$. Using this, we can use the fact that the irreducible characters are an orthonormal basis of all characters and say that: $$\lambda=\sum_{\phi\in\hat{G}}m_\phi \phi$$ And then to find the coefficients, use the inner product: $$m_\phi=\langle \lambda,\phi\rangle=\frac{1}{\vert G\vert}\sum_{g\in G}\phi(g^{-1})\lambda(g)=\frac{\phi(e)}{\vert G\vert}$$ (where all but one of the terms in the sum disappeared since $\lambda(g)=0$ if $g\neq e$). This means that $\lambda=\frac{1}{\vert G\vert}\sum_{\phi\in\hat{G}}\phi(e)\phi$. Then since $\lambda(e)=1$: $$1=\lambda(e)=\frac{1}{\vert G\vert}\sum_{\phi\in\hat{G}}\phi(e)\phi(e)$$ And $\phi(e)=d_\phi$, so that gives that $\sum_{\phi\in\hat{G}}d_\phi^2=\vert G\vert$.

Running with the method you were trying, I don't think $\beta$ is well-defined. For any irreducible representation, there is an equivalent one where I just swap any two vectors. By the orthogonality, we know that for any representation $\phi$, if $i\neq j$, then $\phi_{ii}\neq\phi_{jj}$. Then I can construct an equivalent representation $\phi'=M^{-1}\phi M$, where $M$ swaps $v_1$ and $v_j$, then $\beta(\phi)\neq\beta(\phi')$. But what stops you from simply choosing a representative of each equivalence class of irreducible representations and constructing a set $\hat{G}'$ of these? Then you can define $\beta':\hat{G}'\rightarrow \cup A_\phi$ in the same way and avoid problems of equivalence.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Firstly, thanks for the answer and for your valuable time Sam Jaques. In my problem, by $\hat{G} $, I meant equivalence classes of irreducible representations of $G$ which I forgot to mention about. Sorry! For that. The proof you which gave using regular representation and characters I knew it, but I was trying to prove the injectivity of $\beta$ without using characters and I wanted to show that $\vert \hat{G}\vert \leq \sum_{\phi \in \hat{G}}^{s} d_{\phi}^{2} \leq \vert G \vert$. $\endgroup$ – Shubham Namdeo Aug 21 '16 at 3:54
  • $\begingroup$ I was also discussing the same problem with my friend Senthil Rani and she sujjested me the following answer yesterday. $ \beta $ is well defined : Let $ \{e_1, \ldots, e_n\} $ be the standard basis for $ \mathbb{C}^n $ and $ \langle, \rangle $ be the standard inner product on $ \mathbb{C}^n $. We will show that, if $ \phi \sim \psi $ (i.e. $ \exists $ $ P \in GL_{n}(\mathbb{C}) $ such that $ \phi = P^{-1} \psi P $) then $ \phi_{11}=\psi_{11}$. On contrary, assume that $ \phi_{11} \neq \psi_{11} \Rightarrow $ $ \exists $ $ g \in G $ such that $\endgroup$ – Shubham Namdeo Aug 21 '16 at 4:04
  • $\begingroup$ \begin{alignat*}{2} \quad && \phi_{11}(g) & \neq \psi_{11}(11)\\ \Rightarrow \quad && \langle \phi_{g}e_{1},e_{1} \rangle & \neq \langle \psi_{g}e_{1},e_{1} \rangle \\ \Rightarrow \quad && \langle \phi_{g}e_{1},e_{1} \rangle & \neq \langle (P^{-1}\phi_{g}P) e_{1},e_{1} \rangle \\ \Rightarrow \quad && \langle [\phi_{g}-(P^{-1}\phi_{g}P)]e_{1} ,e_{1} \rangle & \neq 0 \\ \Rightarrow \quad && \phi_{g} - P^{-1}\phi_{g}P & \neq 0\\ \Rightarrow \quad && \phi_{g} & \neq P^{-1}\phi_{g} P\end{alignat*} $\endgroup$ – Shubham Namdeo Aug 21 '16 at 4:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Why is it a contradiction that $\phi_g\neq P^{-1}\phi_g P$? $\endgroup$ – Sam Jaques Aug 22 '16 at 16:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $\beta'$ uses representatives from each equivalence class, instead of the class itself (I called the set of representatives $\hat{G}'$). It's defined explicitly for each element of $\hat{G}'$, so it can't be ill-defined. There's a small issue of whether we can choose such representatives, but since $\hat{G}'$ is finite and every equivalence class is non-empty, that's no problem. $\endgroup$ – Sam Jaques Aug 22 '16 at 21:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.