The Character/Weight of a Representation of an Algebra
This may well be something of a silly question, but if so, then all the more reason I get it straightened out.
I have in the past been working with representations of both groups and algebras, and in the literature I've been using, the traces of the representation matrices of both have always been referred to as characters of the representation.
Now, I'm looking properly into Lie algebras for the first time since far too long ago, and I come across a note that says that the weight of a representation of an algebra is the analogue of the character of a representation of a group.
Are weights of representations of algebras and characters of representations of algebras then the very same thing, and its just that people who work in associative algebra and people who work with Lie algebras uses differing terminology, or is there something of much importance that I am missing here?
Much look forward to getting this sorted out!
representation-theory lie-algebras characters
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
add a comment |
This may well be something of a silly question, but if so, then all the more reason I get it straightened out.
I have in the past been working with representations of both groups and algebras, and in the literature I've been using, the traces of the representation matrices of both have always been referred to as characters of the representation.
Now, I'm looking properly into Lie algebras for the first time since far too long ago, and I come across a note that says that the weight of a representation of an algebra is the analogue of the character of a representation of a group.
Are weights of representations of algebras and characters of representations of algebras then the very same thing, and its just that people who work in associative algebra and people who work with Lie algebras uses differing terminology, or is there something of much importance that I am missing here?
Much look forward to getting this sorted out!
representation-theory lie-algebras characters
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
add a comment |
This may well be something of a silly question, but if so, then all the more reason I get it straightened out.
I have in the past been working with representations of both groups and algebras, and in the literature I've been using, the traces of the representation matrices of both have always been referred to as characters of the representation.
Now, I'm looking properly into Lie algebras for the first time since far too long ago, and I come across a note that says that the weight of a representation of an algebra is the analogue of the character of a representation of a group.
Are weights of representations of algebras and characters of representations of algebras then the very same thing, and its just that people who work in associative algebra and people who work with Lie algebras uses differing terminology, or is there something of much importance that I am missing here?
Much look forward to getting this sorted out!
representation-theory lie-algebras characters
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
This may well be something of a silly question, but if so, then all the more reason I get it straightened out.
I have in the past been working with representations of both groups and algebras, and in the literature I've been using, the traces of the representation matrices of both have always been referred to as characters of the representation.
Now, I'm looking properly into Lie algebras for the first time since far too long ago, and I come across a note that says that the weight of a representation of an algebra is the analogue of the character of a representation of a group.
Are weights of representations of algebras and characters of representations of algebras then the very same thing, and its just that people who work in associative algebra and people who work with Lie algebras uses differing terminology, or is there something of much importance that I am missing here?
Much look forward to getting this sorted out!
representation-theory lie-algebras characters
representation-theory lie-algebras characters
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
asked 2 days ago
StormyTeacupStormyTeacup
1357
1357
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Caveat: not a representation theorist here, and would love to be corrected if this is wrong.
It's a pretty weak (non-mathematical) analogy, and you should not think of them as being the same. What they have in common is that they are combinatorial objects which are relatively easy to compute with, and they tell you everything about the representation, so they are super-important.
So they are analogous in the human sense of the word analogous. But as far as I know, there isn't a nice uber-theory that unifies group representations and Lie algebra representations such that characters and weights become one-and-the-same.
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
A case in point: Whereas a group representation has a unique character associated to it, a Lie algebra representation usually has many weights. (If anything, an irreducible representation is well-encoded in its highest weight.)
– Torsten Schoeneberg
yesterday
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062760%2fthe-character-weight-of-a-representation-of-an-algebra%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Caveat: not a representation theorist here, and would love to be corrected if this is wrong.
It's a pretty weak (non-mathematical) analogy, and you should not think of them as being the same. What they have in common is that they are combinatorial objects which are relatively easy to compute with, and they tell you everything about the representation, so they are super-important.
So they are analogous in the human sense of the word analogous. But as far as I know, there isn't a nice uber-theory that unifies group representations and Lie algebra representations such that characters and weights become one-and-the-same.
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
A case in point: Whereas a group representation has a unique character associated to it, a Lie algebra representation usually has many weights. (If anything, an irreducible representation is well-encoded in its highest weight.)
– Torsten Schoeneberg
yesterday
add a comment |
Caveat: not a representation theorist here, and would love to be corrected if this is wrong.
It's a pretty weak (non-mathematical) analogy, and you should not think of them as being the same. What they have in common is that they are combinatorial objects which are relatively easy to compute with, and they tell you everything about the representation, so they are super-important.
So they are analogous in the human sense of the word analogous. But as far as I know, there isn't a nice uber-theory that unifies group representations and Lie algebra representations such that characters and weights become one-and-the-same.
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
A case in point: Whereas a group representation has a unique character associated to it, a Lie algebra representation usually has many weights. (If anything, an irreducible representation is well-encoded in its highest weight.)
– Torsten Schoeneberg
yesterday
add a comment |
Caveat: not a representation theorist here, and would love to be corrected if this is wrong.
It's a pretty weak (non-mathematical) analogy, and you should not think of them as being the same. What they have in common is that they are combinatorial objects which are relatively easy to compute with, and they tell you everything about the representation, so they are super-important.
So they are analogous in the human sense of the word analogous. But as far as I know, there isn't a nice uber-theory that unifies group representations and Lie algebra representations such that characters and weights become one-and-the-same.
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
Caveat: not a representation theorist here, and would love to be corrected if this is wrong.
It's a pretty weak (non-mathematical) analogy, and you should not think of them as being the same. What they have in common is that they are combinatorial objects which are relatively easy to compute with, and they tell you everything about the representation, so they are super-important.
So they are analogous in the human sense of the word analogous. But as far as I know, there isn't a nice uber-theory that unifies group representations and Lie algebra representations such that characters and weights become one-and-the-same.
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
answered 2 days ago
hunterhunter
14.3k22438
14.3k22438
A case in point: Whereas a group representation has a unique character associated to it, a Lie algebra representation usually has many weights. (If anything, an irreducible representation is well-encoded in its highest weight.)
– Torsten Schoeneberg
yesterday
add a comment |
A case in point: Whereas a group representation has a unique character associated to it, a Lie algebra representation usually has many weights. (If anything, an irreducible representation is well-encoded in its highest weight.)
– Torsten Schoeneberg
yesterday
A case in point: Whereas a group representation has a unique character associated to it, a Lie algebra representation usually has many weights. (If anything, an irreducible representation is well-encoded in its highest weight.)
– Torsten Schoeneberg
yesterday
A case in point: Whereas a group representation has a unique character associated to it, a Lie algebra representation usually has many weights. (If anything, an irreducible representation is well-encoded in its highest weight.)
– Torsten Schoeneberg
yesterday
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062760%2fthe-character-weight-of-a-representation-of-an-algebra%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
