vEnhance's avatar

Dec 25, 2014

🖉 Representation Theory, Part 2: Schur's Lemma

Merry Christmas!

In the previous post I introduced the idea of an irreducible representation and showed that except in fields of low characteristic, these representations decompose completely. In this post I’ll present Schur’s Lemma at talk about what Schur and Maschke tell us about homomorphisms of representations.

1. Motivation

Fix a group GG now, and consider all isomorphism classes of finite-dimensional representations of GG. We’ll denote this set by Irrep(G)\operatorname{Irrep}(G). Maschke’s Theorem tells us that any finite-dimensional representation ρ\rho can be decomposed as ραIrrep(G)ραnα\bigoplus_{\rho_\alpha \in \operatorname{Irrep}(G)} \rho_{\alpha}^{\oplus n_\alpha} where nαn_\alpha is some nonnegative integer. This begs the question: what is nαn_\alpha? Is it even uniquely determined by ρ\rho?

To answer this I first need to compute HomG(ρ,π)\operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \pi) for any two distinct irreducible representations ρ\rho and π\pi. One case is easy.

Lemma 1. Let ρ\rho and π\pi be non-isomorphic irreducible representations (not necessarily finite dimensional). Then there are no nontrivial homomorphisms ϕ:ρπ\phi : \rho \rightarrow \pi. In other words, HomG(ρ,π)={0}\operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \pi) = \{0\}.

I haven’t actually told you what it means for representations to be isomorphic, but you can guess – it just means that there’s a homomorphism of GG-representations between them which is also a bijection of the underlying vector spaces.

Proof: Let ϕ:ρ1ρ2\phi : \rho_1 \rightarrow \rho_2 be a nonzero homomorphism. We can actually prove the following stronger results.

  • If ρ2\rho_2 is irreducible then ϕ\phi is surjective.
  • If ρ1\rho_1 is irreducible then ϕ\phi is injective.

Exercise. Prove the above two results. (Hint: show that Imϕ\operatorname{Im} \phi and kerϕ\ker \phi give rise to subrepresentations.)

Combining these two results gives the lemma because ϕ\phi is now a bijection, and hence an isomorphism. \Box

2. Schur’s lemma

Thus we only have to consider the case ρπ\rho \simeq \pi. The result which relates these is called Schur’s Lemma, but is important enough that we refer to it as a theorem.

Theorem 2 (Schur’s Lemma). Assume kk is algebraically closed. Let ρ\rho be a finite dimensional irreducible representation. Then HomG(ρ,ρ)\operatorname{Hom}_{G} (\rho, \rho) consists precisely of maps of the form vλvv \mapsto \lambda v, where λk\lambda \in k; the only possible maps are multiplication by a scalar. In other words,

HomG(ρ,ρ)k\operatorname{Hom}_{G} (\rho, \rho) \simeq k

and dimHomG(ρ,ρ)=1\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \rho) = 1.

This is NOT in general true without the algebraically closed condition, as the following example shows.

Example. Let k=Rk = {\mathbb R}, let V=R2V = {\mathbb R}^2, and let G=Z3G = {\mathbb Z}_3 act on VV by rotating every xR2\vec x \in {\mathbb R}^2 by 120120^{\circ} around the origin, giving a representation ρ\rho. Then ρ\rho is a counterexample to Schur’s Lemma.

Proof: This representation is clearly irreducible because the only point that it fixes is the origin, so there are no nontrivial subrepresentations.

We can regard now ρ\rho as a map in C{\mathbb C} which is multiplication by e2πi3e^{\frac{2\pi i}{3}}. Then for any other complex number ξ\xi, the map “multiplication by ξ\xi” commutes with the map “multiplication by e2πi3e^{\frac{2\pi i}{3}}”. So in fact HomG(ρ,ρ)C\operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \rho) \simeq {\mathbb C} which has dimension 22. \Box

Now we can give the proof of Schur’s Lemma.

Proof: Clearly any map vλvv \mapsto \lambda v respects the GG-action.

Now consider any THomG(ρ,ρ)T \in \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \rho). Set ρ=(V,ρ)\rho = (V, \cdot_\rho). Here’s the key: because kk is algebraically closed, and we’re over a finite dimensional vector space VV, the map TT has an eigenvalue λ\lambda. Hence by definition VV has a subspace VλV_\lambda over which TT is just multiplication by λ\lambda.

But then VλV_\lambda is a GG-invariant subspace of VV! Since ρ\rho is irreducible, this can only happen if V=VλV = V_\lambda. That means TT is multiplication by λ\lambda for the entire space VV, as desired. \Box

3. Computing dimensions of homomorphisms

Since we can now compute the dimension of the HomG\operatorname{Hom}_G of any two irreducible representations, we can compute the dimension of the HomG\operatorname{Hom}_G for any composition of irreducibles, as follows.

Corollary 3. We have

dimHomG(αραnα,βρβmβ)=αnαmα \dim \operatorname{Hom}_G \left( \bigoplus_\alpha \rho_\alpha^{\oplus n_\alpha}, \bigoplus_\beta \rho_\beta^{\oplus m_\beta} \right) = \sum_{\alpha} n_\alpha m_\alpha

where the direct sums run over the isomorphism classes of irreducibles.

Proof: The Hom\operatorname{Hom} just decomposes over each of the components as

HomG(αραnα,βρβmβ)α,βHomG(ραnα,ρβmβ)α,βHomG(ρα,ρβ)nαmα. \begin{aligned} \operatorname{Hom}_G \left( \bigoplus_\alpha \rho_\alpha^{\oplus n_\alpha}, \bigoplus_\beta \rho_\beta^{\oplus m_\beta} \right) &\simeq \bigoplus_{\alpha, \beta} \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho_\alpha^{\oplus n_\alpha}, \rho_\beta^{\oplus m_\beta}) \\ &\simeq \bigoplus_{\alpha, \beta} \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho_\alpha, \rho_\beta)^{\oplus n_\alpha m_\alpha}. \end{aligned}

Here we’re using the fact that HomG(ρ1ρ2,ρ)=HomG(ρ1,ρ)HomG(ρ2,ρ)\operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho_1 \oplus \rho_2, \rho) = \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho_1, \rho) \oplus \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho_2, \rho) (obvious) and its analog. The claim follows from our lemmas now. \Box

As a special case of this, we can quickly derive the following.

Corollary 4. Suppose ρ=αραnα\rho = \bigoplus_\alpha \rho_\alpha^{n_\alpha} as above. Then for any particular β\beta,

nβ=dimHomG(ρ,ρβ).n_\beta = \dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \rho_\beta).

Proof: We have dimHomG(ρ,ρβ)=nβHomG(ρβ,ρβ)=nβ\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \rho_\beta) = n_\beta \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho_\beta, \rho_\beta) = n_\beta as desired. \Box

This settles the “unique decomposition” in the affirmative. Hurrah!

It might be worth noting that we didn’t actually need Schur’s Lemma if we were solely interested in uniqueness, since without it we would have obtained nβ=dimHomG(ρ,ρβ)dimHomG(ρβ,ρβ).n_\beta = \frac{\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \rho_\beta)}{\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho_\beta, \rho_\beta)}. However, the denominator in that expression is rather unsatisfying, don’t you think?

4. Conclusion

In summary, we have shown the following main results for finite dimensional representations of a group GG.

  • Maschke’s Theorem: If GG is finite and chark\operatorname{char} k does not divide G\left\lvert G \right\rvert, then any finite dimensional representation is a direct sum of irreducibles. This decomposition is unique up to isomorphism.
  • Schur’s Lemma: If kk is algebraically closed, then HomG(ρ,ρ)k\operatorname{Hom}_G(\rho, \rho) \simeq k for any irreducible ρ\rho, while there are no nontrivial homomorphisms between non-isomorphic irreducibles.

In the next post I’ll talk about products of irreducibles, and use them in the fourth post to prove two very elegant results about the irreducibles, as follows.

  1. The number of (isomorphsim classes) of irreducibles ρα\rho_\alpha is equal to the number of conjugacy classes of GG.
  2. We have G=α(dimρα)2\left\lvert G \right\rvert = \sum_\alpha \left( \dim \rho_\alpha \right)^2.

Thanks to Dennis Gaitsgory, who taught me this in his course Math 55a. My notes for Math 55a can be found at my website.