1

I have proven the following statement made by my textbook using a corollary to Schur's Lemma which intimately depends on the existence of eigenvalues for all operators; it therefore intimately depends on the complex and finite-dimensional nature of the vector space. Can the result be generalized to relax this hypothesis? The most important questions to me are whether I can substitute "real" for "complex" and (that which I imagine is less likely?) relaxing "finite-dimensional" entirely.

If $G$ is an abelian group then all its irreducible representations on complex finite-dimensional vector spaces are one-dimensional.

EE18
  • 1,211
  • Consider $G=\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}$ acting on $\mathbb{R}^2$ by rotation of $90°$. This should be irreducible and not $1-$dimensional. – Severin Schraven Jul 24 '23 at 16:27
  • I see, so the result does not hold on real vector spaces. Can the result hold while relaxing "finite-dimensional" somehow, perhaps with some other hypotheses? @SeverinSchraven – EE18 Jul 24 '23 at 16:33
  • For infinite dimensions, I'd try to look at $G=\mathbb{Z}$ acting on $\ell^2(\mathbb{Z})$ as the shift operator. – Severin Schraven Jul 24 '23 at 16:34
  • No worries at all, thanks so much for your help! To confirm, are you saying that the example you gave re: the shift operator proves that the theorem as stated is not true (i.e. without further hypotheses than just deleting "finite-dimensional")? – EE18 Jul 24 '23 at 16:42
  • This is really not my field. You should not trust too much what I am writing. I thought that it is not true, but I realized that the example above does not quite work. – Severin Schraven Jul 24 '23 at 16:44
  • All irreducible representations of finite groups over any field are finite dimensional. An irreducible real representation of a finite abelian group has dimension $1$ or $2$. – Derek Holt Jul 24 '23 at 16:46
  • In infinite dimensions there is the notion of unitary representations for topological groups where a version of Schur's lemma holds true. For more details see for example here https://www-users.cse.umn.edu/~garrett/m/v/unitary_of_top.pdf – Severin Schraven Jul 24 '23 at 17:05
  • This https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2535927/every-irreducible-representation-of-a-compact-group-is-finite-dimensional or this https://mathoverflow.net/questions/119402/why-all-irreducible-representations-of-compact-groups-are-finite-dimensional might also be interesting to you. – Severin Schraven Jul 24 '23 at 19:03

3 Answers3

3

You can actually stretch the arguments to include the case of countable dimensional vector spaces if you are willing to work over $\mathbb C$:

Let $G$ be an abelian group and $\mathsf k$ an algebraically closed field. Write $\mathsf k[G]$ for the group algebra of $G$ over $\mathsf k$, that is, $$ \mathsf k[G]= \{f\colon G\to \mathsf k: f(g)=0 \text{ for all but finitely many } g \in G\} = \text{span}_{\mathsf k}\{1_g: g\in G\} $$ where, if $g,h \in G$ then $1_g(h) = 1$ if $h=g$ and $0$ otherwise, and $\mathsf k[G]$ has multiplication given by convolution, that is, $1_g.1_h = 1_{g.h}$.

Schur's Lemma: If $(V,\rho)$ is an irreducible representation and $A=\text{Hom}_G(V,V)$ is the $\mathsf k$-algebra of $G$-endomorphism of $V$, then $A$ is a division algebra. That is, if $\alpha \in A$ then either $\alpha=0$ or $\alpha$ is invertible.

Proof Let $\alpha\in A$ be non-zero. Because $\alpha$ commutes with the action of $G$, both $\text{ker}(\alpha)$ and $\alpha(V)$ are subspaces of $V$ which are preserved by $G$, and hence as $V$ is irreducible, we must have

  1. $\text{ker}(\alpha) = \{0_V\}$ or $V$, and
  2. $\alpha(V) = \{0_V\}$ or $V$.

But if $\text{ker}(\alpha)=V$ then $\alpha=0$, and so as $\alpha\neq 0$, $\text{ker}(\alpha)=\{0\}$. Similarly, if $\alpha(V)=\{0_V\}$ then again we would have $\alpha=0$, hence we must have $\alpha(V)=V$. Thus $\alpha$ is both injective and surjective and hence it is a bijection. Since the inverse of a linear map is automatically linear, $\alpha$ is invertible.

Now suppose that $\mathsf k$ is a field of uncountable cardinality. Then the field $\mathsf k(t)$ is of uncountable dimension over $\mathsf k$ (consider, for example, the elements $\{1/(t-\lambda): \lambda \in \mathsf k\}$).

Corollary: Let $G$ be an abelian group and $(V,\rho)$ a representation of $G$ over an algebraically closed field $\mathsf k$ of uncountable cardinality (e.g., the complex numbers). If either

i). $V$ has countable dimension (i.e. a countable basis), or

ii). $G$ is countably generated (i.e. if $G$ has a countable set of generators)

then $\dim(V)=1$.

Proof: First note that, for any group $G$ and representation $(V,\rho)$ of $G$, the homomorphism $\rho\colon G\to \text{GL}_{\mathsf k}(V)$ extends to a homomorphism of $\mathsf k$-algebras $\tilde{\rho}\colon \mathsf k[G]\to \text{End}_{\mathsf k}(V)$. When $G$ is abelian, we have $P = \tilde{\rho}(\mathsf k[G])\subseteq A$ and hence, since it is commutative, it is a field. Since $\mathsf k$ is algebraically closed, it follows that if $\alpha \in P$ then either $\alpha$ is transcendental over $\mathsf k$ or $\alpha \in \mathsf k.1_V$. Thus either:

a) $P = \mathsf k.1_V$, or

b) there is some $g \in G$ with $\beta = \rho(g) \in A\backslash \mathsf k.1_V$, and hence we obtain an injective homomorphism $\tau_\beta\colon \mathsf k(t)\to P$ given by $f(t) = f(\beta)$ for all $f(t) \in \mathsf k(t)$.

Now, if $G$ is countably generated, then $\mathsf k[G]$ is a countably generated commutative algebra, and hence of countable dimension, and since it is a quotient of $\mathsf k[G]$, so is $P$. But then clearly $\mathsf k(t)$ cannot occur as a subfield of $P$, so case $ii)$ excludes $b)$ and hence implies $\dim(V)=1$.

Similarly, if $b)$ holds then we may also extend the structure of $V$ as a $\mathsf k$-representation of $G$ to that of a $\mathsf k(t)$-representation via $\tau_{\beta}$. But since $\dim_{\mathsf k}(\mathsf k(t))$ is uncountable, this contradicts the hypothesis $i)$, and hence in that case we must have $P=\mathsf k.1_V$ and so $V$ is $1$-dimensional.

Beyond the countable case, you almost surely need to use more than algebra. A good example (discussed above, but it worth noting) is $L^2(\mathbb R)$. This is a representation of the abelian group $(\mathbb R,+)$ which is not irreducible (it is not even indecomposable) but it contains no irreducible subrepresentations. Instead, the Fourier transform shows that it is a direct integral of irreducible representations $\mathbb C.\exp(i\lambda.x)$.

Additional remark: I am adding this in response to Severin Schraven's question in the comments about the existence of an infinite dimensional irreducible representation of an abelian group $G$. As others have pointed out, any irreducible representation of a finite group is necessarily finite-dimensional, so $G$ must be infinite for this to happen, but in fact we use an idea which also says something interesting in the finite-dimensional case when the field is not algebraically closed: If you want a representation of an abelian group over $\mathbb Q$ which is irreducible but has dimension greater than $1$, one way to do this is to take $$ \Phi_n = \prod_{\substack{1\leq d\leq n\\ (d,n)=1}} (t-\exp(2d\pi i/n)), $$
the minimal polynomial of $\exp(2\pi i/n)$ over $\mathbb Q$, and set $F = \mathbb Q[t]/\langle \Phi_n(t)\rangle$. This is a field of degree $\phi(n)$ (where $\phi(n)$ is Euler's totient function) and the image $\alpha$ of $t$ is an primitive $n$-th root of unity in $F$. Thus $F$ yields a representation $(V,\rho)$ of the cyclic group $C_n$ on $V$ which is just $F$ viewed as a $\mathbb Q$ vector space. It is easy to see that $V$ is irreducible as a representation of $C_n$ since $F=\mathbb Q[\alpha]$.

Example of an infinite dimensional irreducible representation: Now let $\mathsf k$ be a field, and let $\mathsf F=\mathsf k(t)$ be the field of rational functions in $\mathsf k$. The $\mathsf F$ has dimension at least the cardinality of $\mathsf k$ over $\mathsf k$ (as one can see by considering $\{1/(t-\lambda): \lambda \in \mathsf k\}$. If we let $G$ be the abelian group $\mathsf F^*$ and $V$ be $\mathsf K$ viewed as a $\mathsf k$-vector space via the inclusion of fields $\mathsf k \hookrightarrow \mathsf F$, then $(V,\rho)$ is an infinite-dimensional $\mathsf k$-representation of $G$ over $\mathsf k$ which is irreducible: if $v \in V$ is non-zero, then the orbit $G.v = \mathsf F^*$ which certainly spans $\mathsf F$ over $\mathsf k$.

The above construction shows that we can make "big" irreducible representations of abelian groups by making $G$ "big", but this is also a little less esoteric than it sounds:

Fact: Any two algebraically closed fields of the same transcendence degree over $\mathbb Q$ are isomorphic.

Now $\mathbb C$ has uncountable transcendence degree over $\mathbb Q$, and it is not too hard to show that $\mathsf K$, the algebraic closure of $\mathbb C(t)$ also has uncountable transcendence degree thus as abstract fields $\mathbb C$ and $\mathsf K$ are isomorphic.

Using this fact, it follows that the group $\mathbb C^*$ has infinite-dimensional irreducible representations. Indeed take $\mathsf k=\mathbb C$ in the example above, and fix an isomorphism of fields $\tau\colon \mathbb C\to \mathsf K$. Then $(V,\rho\circ \tau_{|\mathbb C^*})$ is a representation of $\mathbb C^*$, and since $\tau$ restricts to an isomorphism of groups $\mathbb C^* \cong \mathsf K^*$, the representation $(V,\rho\circ \tau_{|\mathbb C^*})$ is irreducible.

krm2233
  • 7,230
  • Awesome answer! Do you by chance know an example of an infinite dimensional representation which is irreducible? Respectively, do you have any intuition whether such a thing can exist? – Severin Schraven Jul 27 '23 at 04:43
  • I think my answer is "yes" though I didn't have an example until you asked this! – krm2233 Jul 28 '23 at 19:19
2

This is only a partial answer. I do not know whether there exists an infinite dimensional irreducible representation of any abelian group (here the irreducible should be understood in the same way as for the finite-dimensional case, no topological conditions imposed on the subrepresentation).

Getting real: Finite dimensional irreducible real representations of an abelian group have either dimension $1$ or $2$, see here Irreducible representations over $\Bbb R$. For an example where dimension $2$ appears, consider $G=\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}$ acting on $\mathbb{R}^2$ by rotation around the origin by $90°$. This representation is irreducible as for all $0\neq v \in \mathbb{R}^2$ we have $\rho(\overline{1})v \notin \mathbb{R}v$, i.e. there is no $G$-invariant $1$-dimensional subspace.

Hence, even in the finite-dimensional case you can have irreducible representations having dimension different than one if your field is not algebraically closed.

The case of finite groups: If you are assuming that the group is finite, then the corresponding irreducible representations will be automatically finite-dimensional. To see this, pick $v_0\neq 0$ and consider

$$ W=span\{ \rho(g) v_0 \ : \ g\in G \}. $$

As $v_0\in W$ we get that $W\neq \{0\}$, it is clearly $G$-invariant and as the representation is irreducible, we must have $V=W$. However, $W$ is generated by $\vert G\vert$ vectors and hence, if $G$ is finite, $V=W$ is finite-dimensional. A similar statement holds true for compact groups, see https://mathoverflow.net/questions/119402/why-all-irreducible-representations-of-compact-groups-are-finite-dimensional.

Be wise, topologize: If you wish to deal with infinite-dimensional representation, you might wish to invoke a bit more topology. There is a whole theory for (unitary) representations for topological groups. See for example https://www-users.cse.umn.edu/~garrett/m/v/unitary_of_top.pdf.

  • The theory of non locally compact abelian groups is pretty crazy. Oxtoby has a few results about how pathological these spaces can get. Even a metrizable non locally compact abelian group is not a nice place to be. – Cameron L. Williams Jul 25 '23 at 03:23
  • @CameronWilliams To be honest I thought I would get away with an example of the type $G=\mathbb{Z}$ acting on $\mathbb{R}^\mathbb{Z}$ by shifting basis vectors around (the group is locally compact, but homomorphism is typically discontinuous). But I can't get it to be irreducible. I don't really know much about representation theory, so I have zero intuition whether the statement is actually true or not. – Severin Schraven Jul 25 '23 at 03:38
  • Thank you, I've gone ahead and accepted. Would you be able to comment on why "the representation is irreducible" in the second case? I am thinking about subspaces of $W$, and can feel the statement is true, but am struggling to prove it explicitly. – EE18 Jul 27 '23 at 01:25
  • @EE18 If the representation was reducible we would have a $1$-dimensional $G$-invariant subspace. However, a $1$-dimensional subspace is spanned by a single vector and the rotation does not leave any line invariant. If you wanted to do an explicit computation, assume there exists $v\neq 0$ such that $\rho(\overline{1}) v = \lambda v$, then $$ 0 = \langle v, \rho(\overline{1}) v \rangle = \lambda \Vert v \Vert^2. $$ Thus, $\lambda =0$, however, $\rho(\overline{1})$ is injective, which yields a contradiction. – Severin Schraven Jul 27 '23 at 01:42
  • Apologies for perseverating, but I am still confused. Why can we assume the $G$-invariant subspace would be 1D? Im also not sure I understand your $\overline{1}$ notation. Is this the identity element in the group? – EE18 Jul 27 '23 at 02:19
  • Well, the entire space has dimension $2$, thus any subspace that is neither trivial nor the entire space needs to have dimension $1$. The group is $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z} = { \overline{0}, \overline{1}, \overline{2}, \overline{3} }$. I am denoting by $\overline{n}$ the equivalence class of $n$ in $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}$, you may have seen the notation $[n]$ or $n+4\mathbb{Z}$ instead. – Severin Schraven Jul 27 '23 at 02:25
  • @EE18 Does that make sense to you? Or do I need to elaborate on something specific? – Severin Schraven Jul 27 '23 at 03:08
  • Yes I am a bit confused. You seem to be applying your first claim (over R) in your proof of the second claim. But the first claim relies on the vector space being finite dimensional doesn’t it? Whereas the second claim seems to make the claim even for an infinite dimensional vector space, as long as the group is finite? – EE18 Jul 27 '23 at 04:28
  • You need to be more precise which part you find confusing. Over the reals I am constructing an explicit $2$-dimensional irreducible representation of an abelian group. For finite groups I am just proving that irreducible representations must be finite dimensional (this works for any field). Their proofs are completely independent of each other – Severin Schraven Jul 27 '23 at 04:34
  • I suppose my confusion is that I thought "Irreducible real representations of an abelian group have either dimension 1 or 2" (or, similarly, "Irreducible representations over an algebraically closed field of an abelian group have dimension 1) held only on finite-dimensional vector spaces. That's why I'm confused when, in saying "If you are assuming that the group is finite, then the corresponding irreducible representations will be automatically finite-dimensional", you seem tacitly to be using the "Irreducible real representations of an abelian group have either dimension 1 or 2" despite... – EE18 Jul 27 '23 at 15:12
  • ...it not being clear to me that "Irreducible real representations of an abelian group have either dimension 1 or 2" holds in infinite-dimensional representations. Perhaps I am not following the chain of proofs though, and apologies if so. – EE18 Jul 27 '23 at 15:12
  • Ahh, now I see what you mean. Indeed, the statement that the dimension is $1$ or $2$ is assume that the representation is finite dimensional. However, my point there was more that you can have $2$-dimensional irreducible representations. Apologies for the confusion. – Severin Schraven Jul 27 '23 at 16:19
0

This is in a sense an update to my previous answer, but the perspective is different enough that I think it makes more sense to state it as a separate answer, in that I now want to argue that, in a sense, all irreducible representations of an abelian group are $1$-dimensional:

Lemma: Let $G$ be an abelian group and let $(V,\rho)$ be an irreducible representation of $V$ over a field $\mathsf k$. Then there is a field extension $\mathsf K/\mathsf k$ such that the $\mathsf k$-vector space structure of $V$ extends to a $\mathsf K$-vector space structure and $\dim_{\mathsf K}(V)=1$.

Proof: This is a consequence of Schur's Lemma, which shows that $A = \text{End}_G(V)$ is a division algebra over $\mathsf k$. Since $G$ is abelian, $\mathsf k[G]$ its group algebra is a commutative $\mathsf k$-algebra, and the action map $\rho$ extends to a $\mathsf k$-algebra homomorphism $\mathsf k[G]\to A$. Thus $\tilde{\rho}(\mathsf k[G]) \subseteq A$ is a commutative subalgebra of a division algebra, and hence is a field. Let $\mathsf K = \tilde{\rho}(\mathsf k[G])$ be this field extension of $\mathsf k$.

Now since $\mathsf K\subseteq A=\text{End}_G(V)$, clearly $V$ has the structure of a $\mathsf K$-representation of $G$. However, $\rho(G)\subseteq \mathsf K^*$, thus any $\mathsf K$-subspace of $V$ is a $G$-subrepresentation, hence as $V$ is irreducible, we must have $\dim_{\mathsf K}(V)=1$.

This Lemma explains, in the cases where $\mathsf k$ is a field which is not algebraically closed, how one may find, for a finite abelian group $A$, irreducible $\mathsf k$-representations of (finite) dimension greater than $1$ -- we simply need to chose a field extension $F/\mathsf k$ together with a homomorphism of groups $\theta\colon G \to F^*$ such that $\theta(G)\cap \mathsf k^*\subsetneq \theta(G)$. Then the field $E$ generated by $\mathsf k\cup \theta(G)$ will carry an irreducible representation of $G$ of dimension $[E:\mathsf k]$. The example of $\rho \colon \mathbb Z/4\mathbb Z \to \text{GL}(\mathbb R^2)$ via $\rho(\bar{1}) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0\end{array}\right)$ arises as the case where we take $C_4 \cong \{\pm 1, \pm i\} \subseteq \mathbb C$.

The Lemma also gives a way of constructing infinite groups with infinite dimensional irreducible representations over $\mathsf k$ -- simply chose $\mathsf K$ infinite-dimensional over $\mathsf k$ (for example, $\mathsf k(t)$ the field of rational functions over $\mathsf k$) and let $G=\mathsf K^*$ acting on $\mathsf K$ viewed as a $\mathsf k$-vector space.

krm2233
  • 7,230